Citation
Images, Imagery, and the Construction of Political "Reality" in Cicero's Catilinarian Orations

Material Information

Title:
Images, Imagery, and the Construction of Political "Reality" in Cicero's Catilinarian Orations
Creator:
Miller Reed, Angela B
Place of Publication:
[Gainesville, Fla.]
Publisher:
University of Florida
Publication Date:
Language:
english
Physical Description:
1 online resource (101 p.)

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( M.A.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Latin
Classics
Committee Chair:
Sussman, Lewis A.
Committee Members:
Johnson, Timothy S.
Graduation Date:
8/11/2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Audiences ( jstor )
Consuls ( jstor )
Criminal conspiracy ( jstor )
Divinity ( jstor )
Oratory ( jstor )
Rhetoric ( jstor )
Rumors ( jstor )
Slavery ( jstor )
Speeches ( jstor )
Statues ( jstor )
Classics -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
catilinarian, catiline, cicero, enargeia, ethos, imagery, images, oratory, pathos, perception, persuasion, reality, setting, sight, visual
City of Gainesville ( local )
Genre:
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
Latin thesis, M.A.

Notes

Abstract:
As a great orator and literary stylist, Marcus Tullius Cicero had a talent for employing words to evoke vivid pictorial images. In his four orations against the conspirator L. Sergius Catilina (In Catilinam 1-4), Cicero employs this technique, which the Greeks called enargeia, with the aid of certain stylistic devices and a pattern of imagery that centers around sight and perception. This study will show how Cicero's use of such imagery, in creating a vivid 'reality' in the minds of his listeners, is integral to his persuasive strategy in the Catilinarians. Many scholars have speculated on the historical accuracy of the events and characterizations recorded in these four speeches; however, such disputes do not concern us here. Rather, this study will emphasize the literary aspects of the Catilinarians through a close study of certain stylistic techniques. This project will begin by examining how Cicero's rhetorical theory employs imagery in persuasion. Then in the following chapters the Catilinarian orations will be discussed in detail, with emphasis on Cicero's use of visual imagery and how it animates his portrayal of the following: Catiline and his supporters, the insecurity of the res publica, Cicero himself, and the divine protection of the gods. The evidence reveals that Cicero's colorful evocations are vital constituents of his construction of political 'reality' and contribute substantially to the persuasive power of his oratory. ( en )
General Note:
In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note:
Includes vita.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
General Note:
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
General Note:
This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.A.)--University of Florida, 2007.
General Note:
Adviser: Sussman, Lewis A.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Angela B Miller Reed.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright Miller Reed, Angela B. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Embargo Date:
8/30/2007
Resource Identifier:
660824303 ( OCLC )
Classification:
LD1780 2007 ( lcc )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

millerreed_a.pdf

millerreed_a_Page_059.txt

millerreed_a_Page_012.txt

millerreed_a_Page_018.txt

millerreed_a_Page_056.txt

millerreed_a_Page_057.txt

millerreed_a_Page_078.txt

millerreed_a_Page_023.txt

millerreed_a_Page_075.txt

millerreed_a_Page_019.txt

millerreed_a_Page_006.txt

millerreed_a_Page_098.txt

millerreed_a_Page_011.txt

millerreed_a_Page_085.txt

millerreed_a_Page_004.txt

millerreed_a_Page_063.txt

millerreed_a_Page_096.txt

millerreed_a_Page_049.txt

millerreed_a_Page_082.txt

millerreed_a_Page_092.txt

millerreed_a_pdf.txt

millerreed_a_Page_053.txt

millerreed_a_Page_042.txt

millerreed_a_Page_005.txt

millerreed_a_Page_087.txt

millerreed_a_Page_027.txt

millerreed_a_Page_020.txt

millerreed_a_Page_060.txt

millerreed_a_Page_031.txt

millerreed_a_Page_079.txt

millerreed_a_Page_088.txt

millerreed_a_Page_024.txt

millerreed_a_Page_022.txt

millerreed_a_Page_068.txt

millerreed_a_Page_015.txt

millerreed_a_Page_040.txt

millerreed_a_Page_007.txt

millerreed_a_Page_070.txt

millerreed_a_Page_032.txt

millerreed_a_Page_083.txt

millerreed_a_Page_097.txt

millerreed_a_Page_017.txt

millerreed_a_Page_058.txt

millerreed_a_Page_054.txt

millerreed_a_Page_037.txt

millerreed_a_Page_086.txt

millerreed_a_Page_089.txt

millerreed_a_Page_050.txt

millerreed_a_Page_045.txt

millerreed_a_Page_065.txt

millerreed_a_Page_046.txt

millerreed_a_Page_021.txt

millerreed_a_Page_094.txt

millerreed_a_Page_034.txt

millerreed_a_Page_067.txt

millerreed_a_Page_030.txt

millerreed_a_Page_028.txt

millerreed_a_Page_055.txt

millerreed_a_Page_025.txt

millerreed_a_Page_080.txt

millerreed_a_Page_016.txt

millerreed_a_Page_003.txt

millerreed_a_Page_047.txt

millerreed_a_Page_009.txt

millerreed_a_Page_099.txt

millerreed_a_Page_101.txt

millerreed_a_Page_051.txt

millerreed_a_Page_008.txt

millerreed_a_Page_044.txt

millerreed_a_Page_074.txt

millerreed_a_Page_095.txt

millerreed_a_Page_041.txt

millerreed_a_Page_002.txt

millerreed_a_Page_048.txt

millerreed_a_Page_052.txt

millerreed_a_Page_038.txt

millerreed_a_Page_036.txt

millerreed_a_Page_073.txt

millerreed_a_Page_071.txt

millerreed_a_Page_001.txt

millerreed_a_Page_100.txt

millerreed_a_Page_029.txt

millerreed_a_Page_014.txt

millerreed_a_Page_026.txt

millerreed_a_Page_062.txt

millerreed_a_Page_013.txt

millerreed_a_Page_090.txt

millerreed_a_Page_091.txt

millerreed_a_Page_039.txt

millerreed_a_Page_081.txt

millerreed_a_Page_066.txt

millerreed_a_Page_076.txt

millerreed_a_Page_064.txt

millerreed_a_Page_093.txt

millerreed_a_Page_010.txt

millerreed_a_Page_072.txt

millerreed_a_Page_061.txt

millerreed_a_Page_043.txt

millerreed_a_Page_035.txt

millerreed_a_Page_033.txt

millerreed_a_Page_069.txt

millerreed_a_Page_077.txt

millerreed_a_Page_084.txt


Full Text





of Cicero' s expertise in handling what he portrays as a critical situation in the life of a Roman

statesman--and essentially, the ideal statesman's response to such a crisis. Analyzing these

speeches as a polished representation of Cicero' s talents offers one a glimpse of Cicero the orator

at his highest peak of performance. He did, after all, regard himself as the "embodiment of

Roman oratory in its perfection."29

Setting of the Catilinarians

Without the electronic media and press as exists today, the Roman people were very

dependent upon the spoken word in political discourse. Through a mastery of oratory, therefore,

even an upstart or novus homo like Cicero could acquire political power.30 Undoubtedly, the

young student Cicero must have recognized that his education was "paving his way to the capital

city."31 In attaining the consulship he acquired not only political stature but also social authority,

becoming, in essence, the "media" to the people of Rome. He gained access to their rapt and

impressionable attention by revealing to them in contione the inner workings of the republic.32

In his role as newscaster to the public, Cicero made the most of rumors circulating that

Catiline had intended to assassinate him.33 He may have even originated the rumors,34 but

whatever the case, he acted as if the reports were true, appearing at the elections in July of 63 BC

with a breastplate imperfectly hidden beneath his toga. This bold move fed the sensationalist

appetite of the public and placed pressure on a reluctant senate to act on Cicero' s accusations.


29 Hadas (1952) 122. This conclusion is fairly drawn from Cicero's autobiographical account in Brutus 308-33.

30 To the chagrin of conservatives and old-line Roman families who had for generations controlled the reins of
power. See Scullard (1965).

31 Butler (2002) 5.

32Morstein-Marx (GI r 14 251.

33Catil. 1.11: Ahr. 52.

34Eagle (1949) 25.










The envoys of the Allobroges were brought in next for their testimony (3.9). They

acknowledged the receipt of three letters addressed to their people, given to them by Lentulus,

Cethegus, and Statilius. In addition, they divulged information about the request made by these

men (and Lucius Cassius) that the Allobroges send cavalry forces into Italy as soon as possible,

to join with the infantry already there. Lentulus had even attempted to persuade them, they

admitted, with prophetic pronouncements concerning the destruction (interitum) of the city and

empire; these events, he proclaimed, would coincide with his fated rise as the third Cornelius,

after Cinna and Sulla. In replaying this imagery, as well as the now cliched references to

slaughter and arson in 3.10 (caedem fieri atque urbem incendi), where Cethegus is said to have

argued with the other conspirators on the timing of their revolt, Cicero reiterates to the audience

how great a devastation had threatened the city.

After this testimony, Cicero ordered the letters to be brought forth and read aloud to each

of the accused in turn (3.10). During the process, Cicero repeatedly underscores the physical

evidence against the four men he had indicted. He called for Cethegus first, who identified his

seal (signum) on the letter; Cicero then cut the string (incidimus) and read the letter (legimus) to

the senate. In revisiting this critical moment, Cicero uses plural first-person verbs to indicate

that these actions were collectively done, thereby reaffirming that he had not opened or read the

contents of the letter prior to the senate meeting. The letter, he determined, was written ipsius

manu (by Cethegus' "own hand"); furthermore, while it was read, he observed Cethegus

exhibiting certain signa conscientiae :m1 weakness in the knees (debilitates), downcast

countenance (abiectus), and protracted silence (conticuit)--all indicators of a guilty conscience.



Its Rhet. Her. 2.8: Accusator dicet, si poterit, adversarium, cum ad eum ventum sit, eribuisse, expalluisse, titubasse,
inconstanter locutum esse, concidisse, pollicitum esse liquid; quae signa conscientiae sint. Cf. Cic. Inv. 1.48 and
Part. 114.










Most speeches, as Fantham points out, were fully written prior to oral delivery. The text

that has survived, however, is usually a "revised version, preserved as a record after the

performance."19 CiceoTOS remarks in a letter imply that his Catilinarians were not published as a

corpus until 60 BC, about three years after the events of the conspiracy.20 Scholars generally

concur on this date of publication, though some have looked suspiciously on its timing, noting

how the negative political fallout resulting from Cicero' s handling of the conspiracy may have

influenced his editing of the speeches for the public record.21 This leaves the reader with a

transcript that, to modern sensibilities, seems to compromise the original interchange. In effect,

one cannot know how accurately the extant text reflects what was actually said.22

At the same time, one must be mindful not to approach the text too cynically.

Contemporary readers have a tendency to impose modern preconceptions upon the ancient

world, expecting a precision from the texts that was never intended by the authors. Therefore,

one should be careful about interpreting the speeches literally since, as Rawson stresses, "we

should take care not to be over-indulgent to much ancient historical writing on the grounds that

ancient standards were altogether different from our own."23 Although he never wrote a history

of Rome, it may be presumed that Cicero would have made a model historian in the ancient view

because he exemplified through his writings that blend of "artist and scholar" which was highly


19 Fantham (GI ll 14 132.

20Att. 2.1.3.

21 See Craig (1993) 256-58; Kennedy (1972) 176-77; Stockton (1971) 118ff; Nisbet (1965) 62-3. Cf. Steel (2005)
51-3 who leaves open the possibility that Cicero may be editing previously published work in 60 BC. For a contrary
view, see McDermott (1972) 284 who concludes that the Catilinarian speeches were published right after the
conspiracy, in December of 63 BC. Price (1998) 108 n. 10 appears to agree, emphasizing that Cicero would have
had no need to edit speeches that would be published as a "record of his proud success" (128).

22 Millar (1998) 109. Specifically referencing Catil. 1 and 2, he comments, "As in all such cases, we can tell neither
how accurately the text as preserved reflects what was said at the time nor how the propositions in it were received."

23 Rawson (1972) 44.










2. 11).160 Indeed, Catiline' s flight the night before had only confirmed the truth of Cicero' s

allegations; thus, the time had come for all of Rome to join with the consul in preparing for war

against this public enemy (2.1).

While Cicero's tone is noticeably more aggressive in his second speech, he still needed to

secure the people's trust in his leadership before he could take action. He deflects blame, first of

all, for allowing an enemy so dangerous to leave the city, insisting, "That fault is not mine,

citizens, but is rather a result of the circumstances."161 He would have removed Catiline long

ago, he assures them, and would have risked unpopularity (invidiae, 2.3) and even his own life if

he thought this would have freed them all from danger. But Cicero saw (viderem, 2.4) the

complications-indeed, he foresaw how Catiline' s execution would obstruct his pursuit of the

other conspirators. He therefore arranged (deduxi) the situation so that the people could see

(videretis) their enemy clearly and fight him in the open. He grants them, in essence, the means

to see what he had long been seeing.

Repeatedly, he emphasizes the power of his perception: he "knows" the enemies' plans

(me scire, 2.5), he "sees" how they are organized (Video, 2.6), and now he has "exposed" them

(patefeci). He helps the audience visualize the corruption of Catiline and his companions (2.7-

10), the tense senate proceedings of the day before (2. 12-13), and the sorts of men--debtors,

criminals, and the like--who sympathize with the conspiracy (2.17-23). Informed by such vivid

detail, the people can have no doubt about the seriousness of the conspiracy and their dire need

for a capable, effective leader.





160 May (1988) 52-4.

161 2.3:. non est ista mea culpa, Quirites, sed temporum.









Toward the close of the speech, Cicero begs the senate to listen carefully as he shares what

the fatherland has to say about the danger. In this hypothetical conversation (1.27), Cicero,

speaking as the patria, promptly endorses the authority of his perception; it was he who

'discovered" (comperisti), "sees" (vides), and "perceives" (sentis). Cicero's powerful awareness

at this point is now a given, but what if communicating his observations puts him at risk for

"unpopularity" (invidiae--the "evil eye" of disfavor, 1.29)? Since there are some who cannot

see (non videant) or pretend that they cannot (quae vident dissimulent), their disapproval is a

probability (1.30). Cicero responds with his conviction, ut invidiamn virtute partamttttt~~~~~~tttttt gloriamn, non

invidiamn-that unpopularity born of virtue is not really unpopularity, but rather, honor (1.29).

With this statement, he seals his commitment to Rome's safety at any cost, bolstering his ethos in

the process.

Having "revealed" and "illuminated" (patefacta; inlustrata: 1.32) the conspiracy to them

through the power of his vision, Cicero now vows to show it to them (videatis) also "crushed"

and "punished" (oppressa; vindicate). He leaves his audience with a promise that signals his

transition from passive observer to active combatant. Though he would continue to disclose his

observations and insights when speaking to the people in the Second Catilinarian,159 Catiline' s

departure will make it necessary for him to swiftly adopt a more militaristic persona.

Imperator Togatus

When Cicero opens his address to the people, he launches directly into invective against

the "one certain leader" (quidem unum .. ducem, 2. 1) of civil war--Catiline. May sees his

harangue as a deliberate setup, allowing Cicero's ethos to appear all the more brilliant by

contrast when he offers himself to the people as their leader (Huic ego me bello ducem profiteor,



159 MOre examples of Cicero's continual vigilance occur at 2.19, 26; 3.3, 4, and 27.









himself,17 and while Cicero certainly took many opportunities to do so, Quintilian tells us that

self-praise does not win an audience. 174 CiceoO's primary concern seems to have been for the

proj section of ethos and the influence of his authority. He was not concerned so much with

promoting his oratorical abilities (which Quintilian specifically criticizes), but rather with

convincing Rome of the reality of Catilline' s conspiracy and bolstering confidence in his

leadership during a period of insecurity. As time passed and political opinion concerning

Cicero' s execution of the conspirators began to shift, Cicero likely reedited his speeches to

reinforce his authority when he had them published about three years later.17

Cicero had a talent for "engineer[ing] persuasiveness," which he developed by

"presenting a congruence between his verbal argument and his dignity [ethos] as a speaker." 176

Through the testimony of his sensory perception, Cicero showed the senate and the citizens of

Rome the dangers of the conspiracy. As consul, he assumed a special type of leadership,

dubbing himself the imperator togatus, who would overpower the conspirators with rhetorical

force. When several of Catiline's men were captured and Cicero elicited their confessions of

guilt before the senate, he was triumphant, believing that his efforts had averted the most horrible

civil war of all time. Cicero was thoroughly convincing in presenting his personal merits, and

while he could not imagine any glory more exalted than his own (3.28), he recognized,

nevertheless, that his fame rested on a reputation that could fall out of favor. He therefore

needed some means of permanent endorsement to uphold the righteousness of his actions for all



'73 Allen (1954) 128-30 outlines four: (1) to win benevolentia; (2) in self-defense: (3) in a personal narrative given
publicly; and (4) so one's deeds not be thought accidental.
'7 Inst. 11.1.15-17

1 Kennedy (1972) 176-7. Cf. Bailey (1971) 32-3; Stockton (1971) 118: Fantham (GI r 14 132.

1 6 Bell (1997) 1.









and the manifold dangers of the conspiracy; but, by the end of his second speech, he is left "long

on bravado and obloquy, [yet] short on evidence.""

To remedy this problem, Cicero emerges for his third speech with evidence

conspicuously in hand. Displaying his presentation of visible and incontrovertible proof to the

senate, he makes a powerful appeal to reason by substantiating his allegations against the

conspirators--all the while reminding his audience of what might have been, had he not

perceived the danger. Through these efforts, Cicero hoped to arouse the passionate emotions and

fears of the Roman citizens, ultimately persuading them to seek due vengeance upon the enemies

of the republic.

Rumor and Report

In Pro M~ilone 64, Cicero responds to rumors that had circulated regarding his client' s

alleged stockpiling of munitions for the destruction of Rome. It was reported (likely by Milo' s

enemy P. Clodius Pulcher) that these were even floated down the Tiber to Milo's villa at

Oriculum in preparation for his firing of the city. Such rumors had a "welcome, if fearful

audience"; furthermore, in relating this anecdote, Cicero shows how Clodius used rumor to his

advantage to play upon the fears of the people and "galvanize support for his own violent

methods."86

Cicero' s comments regarding these rumors and their adverse effect on his client's

reputation are not at all surprising. As a public figure, Cicero was frequently the subject of

malicious talk and was well aware of the damage that rumor could do to one' s public image. It

was therefore indispensable for an orator to acquire successful methods for managing the flames



85Gruen (1974) 280. This quotation is also referenced by MacKendrick (1995) 62.

"bLaurence (1994) 71.










safety; and indeed, when the crowd beheld their consul armed in fear and danger, they rushed to

his aid, just as he had anticipated.96

Cicero claims, too, that Catiline had planned to kill the consuls and other prominent men

on the 29th of December 66 (1.15)--a coup frequently referred to as the first Catilinarian

conspiracy. He repeats this account in other speeches, adding new details concerning Catiline's

intention to massacre the Senate that day,97 and his intent to seize the consulship by force.98

Though the tradition of this supposed conspiracy is "hopelessly muddied,"99 it is clear from

Catiline's regular appearances in court and his defeated campaigns for consular office that he

was not a favorite of Roman voters.100

These reports of Catiline' s violent past, if true, attest to his capacity for violence in the

future. Even if untrue, they still implanted violent images and impressions in the minds of

political men who had experienced firsthand the personal scrutiny and exposure of living in the

public eye. It is precisely this potentiality, or the mere suggestion of it, that enables Cicero to

capitalize on his enemy's dark reputation; accordingly, he has depicted Catiline with knife in

hand, menacingly poised to strike his opponents--just as he intends to wound his next victim,

Rome .






96 Cic. Mur. 52: ut omnes boni animadverterent et, cum in metu et periculo consulem viderent, id quod est factum,
ad opem praesidiumque concurrerent.
97 Cic. Mur. 81

98 Cic. Sul. 67-8. Cf. Sall. Cat. 18.5.

99 Gruen (1969) 21.

'00 He was indicted in 65 for extortion and in 63 for crimes during the Sullan proscriptions, though acquitted of the
charges in both cases. He was disqualified from candidacy in the consular elections for 65, legally ineligible for 64
(he was still dealing with court proceedings following his indictment for extortion), and defeated in election for 63
and 62--thanks largely in part to Cicero's invective. See MacDonald's introduction (1977) 2- 6.









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Angela Brook Miller Reed was born on May 8th, 1980 in Montgomery, Alabama. The

oldest of four children, she grew up mostly in Ocala, Florida, graduating from Forest High

School in 1998. She earned her A.A. from Florida College in Temple Terrace before transferring

to the University of Florida where in 2002 she received her B.A. in classical studies, with minors

in English and secondary education. She began work on her M.A. in Latin that fall, but after a

year of full time graduate study, left Gainesville to marry David Reed, a UF alumnus.

Angela and her husband returned to Gainesville the following year so she could continue

her graduate coursework. Between remodeling a fixer-upper and working full-time as a teacher

at Union County High School in Lake Butler, she finally managed to complete her degree

requirements, receiving her M.A in Latin in August 2007. Angela will continue teaching in the

Gainesville area in the fall, when she begin a new position at Cornerstone Academy, instructing

middle and upper level Latin students.










foresight (providebanz, 3.16; provisa, 3.18; ego provide, 3.27)170 and his preemptive action (3.17:

occuri; obstiti: 3.17; a me adnzinistrata; gesta: 3.18; me gessi, 3.25), which prevented all the

horrors of civil war--interitu, caede, sanguine, exercitu, dinsicatione (3.23); infinitae caedi, and

Jla~nmna (3.27)--from destroying the republic. He affirms that they were "rescued" (erepti .

erepti) from a most savage and cruel fate, due to the victorious leadership that he provided--he,

the uno togato d'uce et insperatore. Yes, he did believe a thanksgiving was in order (3.23), but

there was a higher prize that he desired for himself: everlasting remembrance.

In 3.26, Cicero begs this one reward from the people:

Quibus pro tantis rebus, Quirites, nullum ego a vobis praemium virtutis nullum insigne
honors, nullum monumentum laudis postulabo praeterquam huius dici memorial
sempiternam. In animis ego vestris omnis triumphos meos, omnia ornamenta honors,
monument gloriae, laudis insignia condi et conlocari volo.

He does not want a reward (praentiunt), a special emblem (insigne), or a physical memorial set

up in his name (nronuntentunt); he requests only that they commemorate this day within their

hearts for all time." Their remembrance will provide all the triumphos, ornantenta,

nzonuntenta, and insignia that he could ever want. He hopes, furthermore, that his legacy will be

"cherished" in memory (alentur), "elevated" in conversation (a en em),rj "time-honored"

(inveterascent), and "established" (conroborabuntur) in the written records.

Cicero's seeming obsession with his own glory, especially in this speech, may give the

impression that he was arrogant.172 There were good reasons for an orator to speak well of




17o Providere means "to take appropriate steps in anticipation" of something, but does not neglect the idea of vision
contained in its verbal root. See Morstein-Marx (GI ll 14 251-2. Cicero's repeated use of the word signals his
expansion of the consular vision motif to fit his new role as "savior," for whom prescience was implicit.
171 Both May (1988) 57 and Konstan (1993) 18 note the significance of this passage as it relates to Cicero's
ambition.

172 See Allen (1954) for a thorough treatment of this topic. Cf. Quint. Inst. 1 1.1.17-26.









Quintilian offers several examples of how this vivid illustration (similar to description

above, but he uses the terms enargeia and repraesentatio) renders the facts exprimi et oculis

mentis ostendi ("to be portrayed and displayed to the eyes of the mind").79 He notes in particular

how an orator may augment the sympathies of his audience by recounting the sack of a city.so It

is not enough, he suggests, for the speaker merely to report that a city had been stormed; in order

to "penetrate the emotions" of the hearer, he must conjure up in detail all the horrifying sights

and sounds of the pillage, from the flames seen pouring from the houses and temples to the

wailing cries of women and children.8 This is the precisely the strategy that Cicero employs in

his Catilinarians. By constructing potentiality (what might be) with all the vividness of reality

(what is), he transports his audience to a Rome where Catiline's conspiracy has most disastrously

prevailed. In concert, these four speeches reflect "one continuous effort" by Cicero to stir up

indignatio and arouse odium within his audience.82

Cicero's speeches to the people (Catil. 2 and 3) show how greatly he depended on

"stressing the immediate risk" to themselves, their families, and livelihoods.83 He appeals first to

their anxieties by making the most of rumors and reports that were circulating at the time, much

of which had probably originated from claims made in the First Catilinarian.84 This strategy

serves him well in the beginning when he discourses on the reputed immorality of his enemies




79 Inst. 8.3.62

so Inst. 8.3.67: Sic et urbium captarum crescit miseratio.

si Inst. 8.3.67-8: in adfectus... penetrat.

82 Solmsen (1968) 226,7

83 Fantham (1997) 114.

84 Cicero clearly had insufficient proof at the time of the first speech; despite his "confident assertions," it was a
"case of suspicion only" and his reports must be regarded in that light. Hardy (1924) 67.










devoting his attention to the negative aspects of Catiline' s character, he is in fact basing his

argument on ethical considerations.139 This, therefore, may perhaps be regarded as an instance

when pathos is "fueled" by ethos.140

At first, such an example may not seem entirely consistent with Cicero's definition of

ethos in the De Oratore as referred to above. He presents an ethos that esteems the speaker or

those for whom he pleads (conanend'ationent habet nostran~rt~rt~r~rt~rt~rt aut corunt, quos defendintus, 2. 114),

wins the favor of the audience (ut conciliensus eos nobis, qui audiunt, 2. 115), and must, by

recommending his integrity, support his image as a good man (probitatis conanend'atione boni

viri debet specient tueri, 2.211). In short, his ethos seems primarily concerned with the character

of the orator. If, however, one considers the fuller explication of ethos that Cicero provides in

2. 182-4, it becomes clear that ethos relies dually upon convincing the audience of one' s own

good qualities, while at the same time ascribing "opposite qualities to [one' s] opponents."141 It is

in this debasement of one' s enemies that the ethical can be said to "bleed" into the pathetical.

Cicero anticipated that this blending of ethos and pathos would occur in the ideal, finely

orchestrated speech. In 2.310, he speaks about the proper balance of the three persuasive

elements within an oration and the relationship that each should have to the others:

.. una ex tribus his rebus res prae nobis est ferenda, ut nihil aliud nisi docere velle
videamur; reliquae duae, sicuti sanguis in corporibus, sic illae in perpetuis orationibus
fusae esse debebunt;


139 May and Wisse (2001) 34 n. 42 note the difference between the Greek word ethos (T60g), meaning "character,"
and the modern term "ethos," which usually applies in a more restrictive sense to the method of persuasion
"consisting in a positive portrayal of the speaker 's character." Cicero's ethos, as a rhetorical conceit, seems to fit
neither the broad scope of the former, nor the narrow designation of the latter. What the particular nature of his
ethos is will be considered presently.

140 Barber (GI r 1- 42. She argues similarly for the collaboration of pathos and ethos in Cicero's depiction of Marius
in Pro Balbo.

' De. Orat. 2.182: ...eaque oninia, quae proborunt, dentissorunt, non acrium, non pertinaciunt, non ire ,as. r
non acerborunt sunt, valde benevolentiant conciliant abalienantque ab eis, in quibus haec non sunt: itaque
eadenmsunt in adversaries ex contrario conferenda. Translation adopted from May and Wisse (2001) 171.










Cicero had first named Marius, his fellow townsman and a novus homo consul, in his

initial speech before the senate. In 1.4, he recalled two previous times in Rome's history when

the senate, in passing the senatus consultum ultimum, had acted in the best interest of the state by

transferring its power to competent, honorable leaders. Marius, he reminded them, had nobly

served as one of those leaders. According to Sallust, Marius had a grave sense of the

responsibility placed upon his shoulders, and correspondingly, foresaw the effect it would have

on his public image when he declared, "I understand, citizens, that the faces of all have been

turned upon me."132 To secure the citizens' votes of confidence, he advertised his "manly

courage," or virtus,133 to them in a rousing speech, in essence making his own self a "political

spectacle."134

Cicero would strive in like manner to magnify his visibility during the city's

conspiratorial scare. However, there was one inherent difference between Cicero and Marius

that would make it difficult for him to convince the audience of his own virtus. Since Marius

was a man of war, his virtus was an inarguable fact, evidenced by his "scars of battle"; Cicero,

on the other hand, was a man of oratory, whose glory was entirely dependant upon the people's

perceptions of-and reactions to--him.135 As a novus homo and a civilian, Cicero had to rely on

audience feedback to substantiate his claim to the virtus he so coveted. Consequently, the people

held the power to make him "the sort of man he could never be on solely his own merits."136



132 Sall. Jug. 85.5: Et illud intellego, Quirites, omnium ora in me conuersa esse.

133 Virtus is hard to define. Bell (1997) comments, "In general, virtus had no easily articulated essential meaning
except that it made Roman men distinctive. It signified the ideal of manliness. And it made men deserving of a
reward, particularly in dignity of office." Quotation is found on page 19.

134 Bell (1997) 19. Marius' speech is presented in Sall. Jug. 85.

135 Bell (1997) 19.

136 Ibid.









delivered to the crowd, Cicero's reports likely evolved--as hearsay has been shown to do--thus

making Cicero the author and beneficiary of a self-sustaining rumor mill. His obj ective, in

stimulating this process, was to cultivate the anxieties and fears of the people, and eventually

harvest their loyalty in the impending danger.

Failed Plots

In his first speech, Cicero repeatedly asserts that Catiline is a murderer, posing a

continuous threat to anyone who interferes with his ambitions. Cicero accuses him of plotting

the deaths of those in the senate assembly (1.2), and then details all of Catiline' s nefarious plots

of times past. He recollects Catiline' s plans for a massacre on October 2711', plans that were

postponed and then thwarted (1.7-8); he accuses him of slaughtering his former wife and son

(1.14);92 and he attributes the deaths of many citizens (a reference to Catiline's role in the Sullan

proscriptions)93 to him as well (1.18).

Cicero also recounts the times when, as consul-designate in 64, he had to defend himself

against Catiline's treachery through his own personal vigilance.94 Additionally, he recalls the

consular elections of July 63, reminding the audience that Catiline had intended to strike him and

others down on that occasion (1.11). In all likelihood, Cicero hoped his allusion to the elections

would conjure up a vivid image of his appearance before the crowd that day--resplendent in

consular white, with the flash of a metal breastplate poorly concealed beneath his toga.95 He

admitted later that his attire had been selected more for its effect on the citizens than for his own





92 Cicero's reference here to the son's murder is veiled. Sallust clearly connects this crime to Catiline in Cat. 15.2.

93 MacDonald (1977) 50 n. a.

94 Catil. 1.11: private Job s;...ar,, defend.

95 Eagle (1946) 25. Cf. Stockton (1971) 100; Phillips (1976) 442; Everitt (2003) 100.










.. viderem--Cicero speaking as if Catiline), he must endure one of two consequences. He can

either withdraw from the sight of the citizens (carere .. aspect civium) as Cicero would prefer,

or suffer the gaze by the hostile eyes of all (infestis omnium oculis). Neither option would appeal

to a Roman, for to be away from the city was exile and to be the obj ect of the uninhibited gaze

was "desouling," which Barton likens to "visual assassination."53 With this suggestion, Cicero

directs all eyes to look without remorse upon the enemy of the state.

As they scrutinize Catiline, Cicero asks him why he hesitates to avoid the sight and

presence (aspectum praesentiamque) of those men he is harming. He reminds the senators what

damage this man has done to their minds and hearts; he has threatened not just their external

bodies, but has rather wounded them to the core of their being. By charging Catiline with

terrorism, Cicero hopes to provoke an emotional response, or pathos, from the intended victims.

For evidence he points to the behavior of Catiline, who boldly sits without remorse in their

presence (praesentiam), challenging their gaze (aspectum). Hardy affirms that Catiline came to

the senate that day "determined to bluff the matter out";54 but his blatant affront, to the contrary,

demonstrated that he did not possess the proper sensitivities and pudor of a respectable Roman

citizen." In fact, Cicero perceived this same shameless nature when he later observed, Neque

enim is es, Catilina, ut te .. pudor a turpitudine .. revocarit ("Indeed, you are not the man,

Catiline, to be reclaimed from disgrace by a sense of shame," 1.22). A man whose actions reveal

such emotional displacement poses a considerable risk to the safety of others, he concludes,



53 Barton (1999) 255. In Roman society, the gaze had the power to confer respect, through inhibition, or to
shamelessly expose and cannibalize when uninhibited. Barton continues, "The gaze without compunction signaled
the loss of trust, the end of the collusion between the seer and the seen, the breakdown of a common bond and of the
security and camaraderie created by the mutual inhibition of the eyes. The uninhibited gaze made every Thou an It,
something one could consume, something one could destroy with impunity and without regret."

54 Hardy (1924) 66.

55 See Barton (1999) for the psychology of Roman pudor.









IMAGES, IMAGERY, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF POLITICAL "REALITY"
IN CICERO'S CA TILINARIAN ORATIONS




















By

ANGELA BROOK MILLER REED


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2007










desecration their very presence implies, especially since they were openly seeking to destroy the

"temples of the immortal gods" templea deorum immortalium, 1.12).

Cicero' s second exclamation, mehercule!i, punctuates his review of Catiline' s ostracism

within their assembly--an isolation which further mirrors the inappropriateness of his presence

there (1.17). Cicero again reminds the senators of their temple locale (1.21: hoc ipso in temple),

again he directs their minds to the fortification enveloping it (illi equites Romani. ceterique

fortissimi cives .. videre .. perspicere .. exaudire potuisti), and then he cries out with yet

another exclamation (Utinamn tibi istamtttttttt~~~~~~~~~ mentem di immortales duint!, 1.22). While he trusts in

the security of these visible safeguards, he laments their ineffectiveness in deterring Catiline who

he wishes--albeit vainly--would follow the prompting of the gods to leave the city in peace.

Cicero speaks again of Jupiter in the climactic ending of his speech (1.33), only this time

he tells not of what the god had done for the city, but rather what he will do. Cicero makes a

direct appeal to Tu, luppiter, "who were established by the same auspices as those by which

Romulus established the city."192 Vasaly discusses the syntax here at length, interpreting the

allusion to Romulus and the auspices thus: that just as Romulus had received divine sanction for

founding the city, so too did he establish a covenant with Jupiter, whom he "founded" as Stator

of the city for all time.193 She notes further:

.. in this place, closely connected both with the founding of the city by Romulus and his
defense of it in the battle against the Sabines, Cicero could foster his own "Romulean" role
as political, moral, and spiritual leader of Rome in its hour of crisis.194





192 1.33: Tu, luppiter, qui isdem quidbus haec urbs auspiciis a Romulo es constitutus .. Translation from Vasaly
(1993) 55.
193 Vasaly (1993) 55-6.
194 Ibid. 59.









CHAPTER 1
CICERO ON RHETORIC

The Orator's Devices

An anonymous Latin proverb goes thus: Campus habet lumen, et habet nemus auris

acumen. The field has sight (literally, "an eye"), and the grove a sharp ear. This sentiment has

been echoed throughout the centuries by such notable authors as Chaucer, Cervantes, and

Tennyson.' In fact, Marcus Tullius Cicero may have had this thought in mind when he said, as

recorded in his First Catilinarian: multorum te etiamn oculi et aures non sentientem, sicut adhuc

fecerunt, speculabuntur atque custodient.2 "Indeed, the eyes and ears of many will be observing

and keeping watch upon you unawares, just as they have done up until now." Cicero's figurative

oculi and aures seem a close parallel to the lumen and auris of the proverb. These concurrent

images serve as a reminder that one cannot hide from the world; despite attempts to fade into

oblivion, one will always encounter observation, even unwittingly. Thus, with the aid of vivid

sensory imagery, Cicero passes along a stern warning to Catiline that his evil character will never

go unnoticed.

In like manner to Cicero's oculi et aures, other authors have crafted images of sight and

perception to enhance the vividness of their style. In the Old Testament book of Proverbs, the

writer declares that the Lord God made both the "hearing ear" and the "seeing eye,"3 thus

describing the God-given parts of the body in terms of their relationship and benefit to the whole.

In keeping with his succinct style, the writer of Proverbs uses a literary device known as

metonomy, substituting qualities (seeing and hearing) for their proper names (visual and auditory


originall author unknown. See Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, 16 h ed. (1992) 130:14 and accompanying footnote
for a list of related quotations. This sentiment has been repeated so often that it is now considered cliche.

2 Catil. 1.6. The Latin text of the Catilinarians is adopted from the Oxford Classical Texts.

3 Prov. 20.12, KJV.










There were some who were incapable of relating to this common bond among the

populace and who, because of their crimes against the state, proved that they were actually quite

hostile to the concept of unity. Cicero, in removing (excipio) and separating (secerno) these

men--the conspirators--from society, had only made their moral and social isolation visibly

official (4.15). But here, Cicero makes a very important distinction concerning their identity: the

conspirators are not to be classed as wicked citizens, he advises the senate; they are to be viewed,

rather, as most despicable enemies.232 He echoes a similar sentiment in 4. 16 when he contrasts

the freedman who greatly prizes his citizenship--or the slave who would eagerly possess it-

with the aristocrat who disdains it because he see his countrymen as enemies.

But Cicero does not consider these men for long. He calls upon the gods (di immortales!,

4.15), as he had the senate, to observe "with what crowds, enthusiasm, and courage" (qua

Jfrequentia, quo studio, qua virtute) the people "j oin together" (musem~'iniu)j to promote the

security and worth of all (communem). Cicero represents these loyal and supportive people as

the very heart of Rome, including among them: knights (4. 15, 22), tribunes (4. 15), clerks (4. 15),

freeborn citizens (4.16), the poor (4.16), freedmen, (4.16), slaves (4.16), and tradesmen (4.17); in

short, all classes (4. 18, 19), all Roman people (4. 19), and all loyal citizens (4.22), he says,

support the senate's decision. Just as he could see (video .. video, 4.15) all these people

gathered, so too could the senate. Cicero also focuses the senators' minds on the appearance

(aspectus, 4.16) of the city, which could be seen outside in the area of the Forum. The city, he

reminds them, and all that composes it--temples, freedoms, daylight, soil--is the common

(commune) possession of them all, and is yet another example of their shared interests.




232 If Cicero could successfully "create the impression" that these men were enemies, and not citizens, this
distinction would help to justify their execution. Cf. Habicht (1990) 37.










1.12). We will examine in the next chapter how Cicero expands upon this metaphor to paint a

horrific picture of Rome exposed to the plague of Catiline and his cronies.









Classical Journals

AJPh American Journal ofPhilology

CJ The Classical journal

CPh Classical Philology

G&R Greece and Rome

HSPh Harvard Studies in Classical Philology

JRS Journal ofRoman Studies

SyllClass Syllecta Classica

TAPhA Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association









or easily imagined), Cicero alludes back to the authority of his consular vision, which had

enabled him to detect and suppress a conspiracy that had threatened the security of their public

places and was responsible for their existing concern. He desires them to trust his vision still, so

he strives to alleviate their worry by helping them see what it is that he sees--a room full of

people who are united in a common purpose, and are collectively empowered to make a decision

for the good of the republic.

Cicero acknowledges the potential for discord in the assembly, stemming from a

disagreement between Silanus and Caesar regarding the best punishment for the conspirators

(4.7-8). Though Cicero sided in opinion with Silanus, who favored execution, he had to be very

careful not to appear to lead the senate to this decision. The dilemma of his situation was that he

needed "to speak persuasively in a venue that precluded his arguing explicitly for either side."231

The record of his speech, therefore, shows his efforts to demonstrate the solidarity of the senate,

who needed assurance that the consul would uphold whatever decision they made as a unified

body (4.14).

Cicero embarks on this theme of unity beginning in 4.14, where he assesses, once again,

the scenery of his surroundings. "Everyone" (Omnes) is present--men "of every rank" (omnium

ordinum), "of every class" (omnium generum), and "of every age" (omnium .. aetatum).

Despite their inherent differences, these men can be seen crowding the Forum, the temples

around the Forum, and the spaces surrounding the temples, filling them to capacity (plenum .

plena .. pleni). In this massive gathering of people, Cicero perceives something remarkable,

something that the city had not experienced since its founding: unanimity (omnes sentirent

unum) .

231 Cape (1995) 272. Put another way, he would need to manipulate his audience "by appearing not to manipulate"
(274).










Surrounding the orator were buildings and monuments that conveyed a multitude of associations,

simultaneously political, historical, and religious.203 Indeed, there was perhaps "no place in

ancient Rome more intricate and multilayered" in meaning than the Forum.204 Even the Rostra

from which Cicero spoke, which elevated him above the crowd, would have added its own

symbolic meaning to the panorama.20 In this setting, therefore, Cicero's allusions to the gods

would undoubtedly have maximum impact.

He opens his third speech proclaiming the city's salvation, which was accomplished "by

the highest love" (summo .. amnore, 3.1) of the immortal gods for the people. He attributes this

success to his own efforts as well: it was through his labors, deliberations, and personal risks

(laboribus, consibiis, periculis meis) that the city was "snatched" (ereptam)tt~~~~~ttttt~~~~ and "preserved"

(conserva~~ttttam)t~~~~ttt from destruction. As Cicero describes the peril that the people had avoided, one

can easily envision them looking around at their surroundings and imaging how the Forum might

have appeared if the conspiracy had succeeded. Furthermore, in claiming responsibility for

saving the "temples" and "shrines" (temples; delubris, 3.2) as well as the rest of the city from the

fires of the enemy, Cicero depicts himself as the "agent" of the gods, who had, like Romulus,

faithfully carried out the gods' will for Rome and ought to receive like recognition.206 The day

of the city' s salvation is just as important as the day of its founding, he reasons; therefore, as they






203 Vasaly (1993) 69. See pp. 60-75 for a detailed analysis of these structures and their various connotations for
Cicero's audience.

204 Vasaly (1993) 61.

205 MOrstein-Marx (lI r 14) 252 suggests that the height of the Rostra above the crowd symbolized the p~ott e1 of
[Cicero's] metaphorical vision," a view that fits well with the concept of the visual we have been exploring
throughout this study.

206 Habicht (1990) 33. Cf. Morstein-Marx (21 1 14) 252.









aids was also a statue of Jupiter, which just so happened (presumably) to be re-erected on the day

of Cicero' s Third Catilinarian.

In order to understand the full effect of Cicero' s allusions to this statue, we must first

consider how he prepared his audience for the illusion of divine intervention in the matter of the

conspiracy. In his Second Catilinarian, Cicero refers to the gods several times when he apprises

the people, as he had the senate, of the danger of the conspiracy. He describes the scene of the

senate meeting the day before, the "temple" (aedem, 2. 12) of Jupiter Stator, in which Catiline,

the "degenerate citizen" (perditum civem) and "most offensive enemy" (importunissimum

hostem) had appeared and was appropriately rebuffed by all those in attendance. In the interval

since that meeting, Catiline had left the city, thereby proving Cicero's contentions; but Cicero,

who was committed to keeping the people abreast of Catiline' s whereabouts and activities, warns

them that they would in three days hear report the that Catiline had assumed leadership of an

"army of enemies" (exercitum hostium, 2. 15). Though his news is distressing, Cicero declares

that he will never desire the immortal gods (dis immortalibus) to ease the burden of unpopularity

(invidiae) that he must endure for sharing this unpleasant report with the people.

Cicero displays his confidence in the gods' protection at three moments in the second

speech. In 2. 19, after affirming his own loyalty to Rome and reminding the crowd of the many

devoted men and soldiers that support the republic, he expresses his conviction that the deos

immortalis will bring them help against their enemies, who are "so great a force of present

wickedness" (tantamtttttttt~~~~~~~~ vim sceleris praesentis). In 2.25, he describes the scene of the impending

battle with the enemy, pitting the "sink of iniquity" (tot et tanta vitia) of Catiline' s army against

the "sterling virtues" (praeclarissimis virtutibus) of those under Cicero's command.199 In this


199 These more poetic translations are from MacDonald (1977) 95.










These signs from the gods were not, therefore, an indication of "divine displeasure";

rather, they served as physical warnings of "conceptual" dangers.217 Vasaly elaborates:

Just as lightning had struck the capital, destructive plans that would strike at the heart of
the city were being formed; as the Capitolium had been ravaged by fire, so the plans
would include an attack by fire on Rome; and as the physical monument of the Laws had
been destroyed, in the future the conceptual laws would be overtumed.218


The desecration of these symbols represented the future destruction of all that was sacred to

Rome and her citizens. For this reason the soothsayers recommended that the people

demonstrate their reverence for the sacred gods who had the power to circumvent fate. Cicero,

therefore, encouraged the people to pray (2.29, 3.29),219 and offered up prayers himself (1.15,

33), which were answered by the gods' kindly intervention on their behalf.220

The enemies of Rome also claimed to have received portents from the gods. In 3.9,

Cicero reveals that Lentulus had tried to convince the Allobroges of his destiny as the "third

Comelius" to rule.221 Lentulus told them that his rise had been foretold by the Sibylline books

and the soothsayers (ex fatis Sibyllinis haruspicumque responsis), and that there were other

signs--that this was the year fated (fatalem) for the republic's destruction, as it had been ten

years since the acquittal of the Vestal Virgins, and twenty years since the burning of the

Capital--which also supported his claim to power. When later confronted with his assertions in


217 Vasaly (1993) 82.
21s Ibid.

219 In the end, Cicero could trust that his overview of these portents would meet with the "full understanding and
consent [of] his audience," who would participate in whatever way they could to suppress the conspiracy. See
Altheim (1938) 422.

2 Cicero also stresses the necessity of offering up a prayer of thankgiving (supplicatio) to the gods after the city's
salvation in 3.15 and 23. Curiously, he omits the gods when mentioning this thanksgiving in his fourth speech (4.5,
10, 20), which he delivered to the senate--who decreed the thanksgiving to the gods in the first place!i
2 The first "Comnelius" was L. Comnelius Cinna, the Marian leader and consul from 87-85. The second "Comnelius"
was L. Comnelius Sulla, the dictator. MacDonald (1977) 108 n. b.










these signs (Nam ut illa omitt amttttt~~~~~~tttttt .. relinquamn, ut omittamttttt~~~~~~tttttt cetera), he effectively draws

attention to them so that the audience can connect these occurances with an event he is about to

describe, which "must not be omitted or overlooked" (neque praetermittendum neque

reliquendum est).

During the consulship of Cotta and Torquatus in 65 B.C., Cicero reminds them, a

lightning storm damaged many objects on the Capitoline (3.19). Images of the gods (simulacra

deorum), statues of forefathers (statuae veterum hominum), and bronze tablets of the law (legum

aera) were respectively "knocked over," "thrown down," and "melted" (depulsa, deiectae, and

liquefacta). In every instance, sacred and symbolic items--including a statue of Romulus, the

revered founder of Rome-suffered violence. When the soothsayers from Etruria gathered

together to interpret these signs, they prophesied that

.. caedis atque incendia et legum interitum et bellum civil ac domesticum et totius
urbis atque imperi occa~sum appropinquare dixerunt, nisi di immortales omni ratione
placati suo numine propefata ipsa flexissent (3.19).


All the horrors of death and destruction could be averted if the gods were "appeased" (placati)

by every method to redirect "that nearby fate" (propefata ipsa) by their divine power. Cicero

points out that that everything was done to satisfy the gods (3.20); games were held for ten days

and a larger statue of Jupiter was commissioned for replacement overlooking the Forum. These

efforts culminated in the spectacle that greeted the audience that morning--the raising up of

Jupiter' s simulacum at the moment that Catiline' s conspiracy became apparent to all-

suggesting that the gods had indeed been placated and had used their influence to save the

Republic from an ominous fate.









distant vantage point to a close encounter with the enemy. With his magnification, he reinforces

the danger that Catiline poses to all present, as indicated in his shifty eyes that presumably

conceal diabolic intentions.

Cicero continues to rely on visual references as he depicts for the audience his impression

of the man Catiline. In 1.5 he describes the scene of an enemy camp in Etruria; he then brings

the danger into close range, announcing that the commander of that camp and leader of enemies

sits before their very eyes (videtis). He does not sit idly; rather, he plots in public view--within

the city walls (intra moenia) and even in the Senate (in senatu)--making daily preparations for

the destruction of the Republic. That an enemy lives intra moenia obviously compromises the

security of the city; that this same enemy has gained access to the inner sanctum of political

power in senatu is an infiltration of extreme urgency. Cicero recalls these broken defenses to

reinforce a discomfiting truth: there is a traitor in their midst. Though he vows to keep Catiline

physically contained by guards as a preventative measure, the oculi et aures of many will still be

watching, waiting for Catiline to slip up and betray himself (1.6).

These images of Catiline' s intrusion appear frequently in the beginning of the first

speech.49 Such images allow Cicero to exploit Catiline's presence in the senate, transforming his

mere appearance into covert invasion. Cicero then introduces images of concealment to

persuade his audience of Catiline' s proclivity for deceit.'" Why should Catiline continue his

charade (1.7)? Night cannot hide (obscurare), nor can walls enclose (continere) the evidences of

his deceit, Cicero reasons. Everything has in fact come to light (inlustrantur) and has burst forth


49 Konstan (1993) 14.
so Ibid.









Cicero bids the traitors to depart: sit denique inscriptum in fr~onte unius cuiusque quid de re

public sentiat (1.32). Let there be written, he says, on the brow (in fronte) of every citizen, his

resolve to stand against the conspiracy for the sake of the republic. Cicero requests this explicit

commitment from the senators, knowing that the citizens will follow their lead. If all Romans

openly display what they feel about the republic, the protector of their livelihood, the pestis of

Catiline and his conspiracy will not prevail. With this final entreaty, Cicero unites himself with

the senators against the Catilinarian threat to Rome.

Though his careful and sustained development of this metaphor, Cicero evokes dreadful

images of plague and death--which, by association, drench the conspirators in Roman blood.

Cicero admonishes the senators for their inaction in the impending crisis, chiding them for

neglecting the safety of their fellow citizens propter invidiamn aut alicuius periculi metum

("because of unpopularity or some fear of danger," 1.28). He reminds them of the result,

envisioning cum bello va~stabitur Italia, vexabuntur urbes, tecta ardebunt ("when Italy is ravaged

by war, her cities are destroyed, and her buildings are aflame," 1.29). Rather than speculate about

the danger that Catiline may bring to the city, he imagines a future in which the devastation is

evident. He reminds them to consider the damage that will also be done to their reputations,

which will burn in a fire of unpopularity (invidiae) if they fail to act on Cicero' s warnings."

Cicero, at the time of his first speech, did not know exactly how many supporters Catiline

had among the crowd. Much of his rhetoric was meant to blacken his enemy' s reputation, but

would also effectively distinguish the good men from the bad.76 To this end, Cicero asks for

Catiline' s departure, hoping this will rid the city of the "deadly sewage" (perniciosa sentmna,


75 1.29:. te non existimas invidiae incendio condagrantlcrumrl?

76 Konstan (1993) 13: "Who counts among the boni--is what he must decide .. and also bring about the majority
he desires" by his rhetoric.










emphasize their unity with each other and with the gods when urging the senate to execute the

conspirators. In this way, he procures divine approval for their action--overseen, as it was, by

the immortal gods.

Jupiter's Providentia

In his discussion of boasting, Quintilian defends Cicero's self-promotion in the

Catilinarians, excusing it because he had attributed his victory either to the virtus of the senate

or to the providentia of the immortal gods. l Cicero would acknowledge this divine assistance

in other speeches as well, most notably in Pro M~urena 82 and in Pro Sulla 5. His comments in a

letter to Atticus seem to indicate that the faith he professed in divine providence may even have

been genuine, though this is not conclusive.186 Whatever the authenticity of his faith, it is clear

that Cicero utilized the gods, and in particular the supreme god Jupiter, to focus the audience's

attention on the seriousness of the conspiracy and, moreover, to prove that his role in saving the

republic was, in fact, divinely appointed.

His Temple

Cicero addresses Jupiter directly for the first time while speaking to the senate inside the

god' s temple: the Temple of Jupiter Stator. Vasaly provides a thorough overview of the history

of this temple, which, while it is too lengthy to rehearse here, is helpful for understanding the

characters and events that Cicero's audience would have associated with this site.'" In short, the

temple was established as a reminder of the city' s salvation by divine intervention in the war

with the Sabines, in fulfillment of Romulus' promise to Jupiter. The temple thus commemorated

Jupiter' s role as the Stator, or "Stayer" who had defended the city at its weakest moment.

' Quint. Inst. 11.1.23.
186Att. 1.16.6: Rei publicae statum illum quem tu meo consilio, ego divine confirmatum putabam ...

1s? Vasaly (1993) 43-6.









theory was the fact of Catiline' s hasty departure from Rome after Cicero' s censure of him in the

senate (2.1, 6), which had delayed the conspirators' plans. In his view, the preservation of the

status quo within the city--i.e., the continued safety of Rome and her citizens--further

confirmed that all had indeed been saved from ruin when Catiline left (2.2). However, Cicero

did not believe that this security would last. Within a few days' time of his second speech, he

expected to hear the report that Catiline was marching at the head of an enemy army (2. 14-5). In

addition, he knew that many of Catiline's accomplices still remained in the city, men whose

traitorous association continually threatened the public safety (2.4, 6).

In less than a month, Cicero arranged and executed a plan to flush some of these enemies

out of hiding. His efforts were fruitful, resulting in the arrest and confession of a number of

prominent men on the 2nd and 3rd of December. Triumphantly, Cicero announces this news to

the people on December 3rd in his third speech, avidly detailing the success of his sting operation

and the subsequent hearing before the senate in which letters, seals, confessions, and guilty

expressions convicted these men of conspiring with Catiline to make war against the Roman

republic.

Cicero opens loftily with the words Rem publicam, which he then defines in terms that

people value--their lives, properties and possessions, wives, children, and the city, the very heart

of the empire (3.1). Right away, these domestic comforts are juxtaposed with the imagery of

flamnma atque ferro, as Cicero informs the audience that on that very day the republic had been

ereptam...conservatam...restitutam ("snatched," "preserved," and "restored") from thett~tt~tt~tt "sntchd,""prseved" ad "esore") romth

destruction of "fire and sword." Vasaly notes how Cicero' s "suspension" of the verb videtis ("as

you see") to the end of the sentence is significant, given its meaning in the context of the speech,

since "throughout the oration as a whole, Cicero continually emphasizes the importance of the









offer thanks to the gods for their founder, so they ought to remember and revere their "re-

founder.",207

Cicero has now been given the opportunity ab dis inanortalibus ("from the immortal

gods," 3.4)--and one for which he had long waited--to reveal all that he had "plainly"

(manifesto) discerned to the senate and the people. He proceeds then, in 3.5-15, to relate the

circumstances resulting in the arrest of several conspirators and their subsequent prosecution in

the senate. He mentions, of course, the honor of a supplicatio, or "thanksgiving," that the senate

had decreed to the immortal gods (dis inanortalibus) in his behalf, which, one can safely assume,

he intended as further justification for his authority. After reminding them again of Catiline' s

depravity in 3.16-17, Cicero launches into an extended review (3.18-22) of how the gods'

involvement and his own guidance had guaranteed the preservation of Rome.

He readily attributes his deeds and foresight (3.18: et gesta et provisa) to divine direction,

specifically, he claims that all his actions were dependent upon the "will and purpose" (nutu

atque consilio) of the immortal gods. Because they were continually "at hand" (praesentes) to

offer their "power and assistance" (opent et auxilium) to them, he suggests that the deities could

almost be seen there in the Forum, before their very eyes (. ut cos paene oculis videre

possintus). Following this intimation, Cicero begins to survey the many portents, or observable

manifestations of the gods' power--the most conspicuous of which was the inauguration that

day of new statue of the supreme god Jupiter (3.20). Acknowledging this "miraculous

coincidence,"208 he regards this statue not as a mere image, but as the "sacrosanct visible


20 Vasaly (1993) 80.

20 Konstan (1993) 18.









Cicero therefore endeavored to present himself to his audience in the best possible light.

To this end, he proj ects the persona of one immensely qualified to lead. He reminds them, first

of all (in Catil. 1), of the superiority of his vision, which enabled him to detect early on the subtle

workings of the conspiracy. Then (in Catil. 2), he portrays himself as the imperator togatus

("general in toga"), ready to combat the enemies of Rome with the weapons of rhetoric. Lastly

(in Catil. 3), with the conspiracy exposed and the traitors in custody, he receives the laurels for

his efforts, glorying in his nomination as savior of the republic. A common theme that emerges

in each of these speeches concerns Cicero' s preoccupation with the appearance and validity of

his own authority. In leading his listeners to observe, appreciate, and reward his efforts, he

aimed to elevate his status and influence in the public arena. Before we examine Cicero's self-

depictions, let us first consider the importance of ethos, the method by which the orator, in

advertising his character, increases the persuasive effect of his oratory.

The Importance of Ethos

In De Oratore 2. 115, Cicero outlines three means of persuasion available to the orator:

(1) arguing with logic; (2) inspiring the audience's goodwill; and (3) appealing to emotion.137

These methods are also referred to respectively as logos, ethos, and pathos, though Cicero avoids

using these specific terms.138 We have already seen numerous examples of pathos in the

Catilinarians; in the last chapter, we analyzed how Cicero employed it in his description of the

city ravaged by fire and sword. Moreover, in chapter 2, we explored how Cicero appealed to

pathos in his vivid portrayal of Catiline, his friends, and their depravity, so as to foment the

audience's animosity toward them. Cicero's tactic here is not entirely pathetic, however; in


137 Ita omnis ratio dicendi tribus ad persuadendum rebus est nixa: ut probemus vera esse, quae defendimus; ut
conciliemus eos nobis, qui audiunt; ut animos corum, ad quemcumque causa postulabit motum, vocemus.

138 The terms derive from Aristotle. See Corbett (1965) 50; May and Wisse (2001) 30, 34.










LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Classical Authors and Works


Ari st.


Aristotle


Poet.

Rhet.

Cic.

Att.

Cael.

Catil.

Cons. fr.

De Orat.

Inv.

M~ur.

Off

Orat.

Part.

Sul.

Plin.

Nat.

Quint.

Inst.

Rhet. Her.

Sall.

Cat.

Jug.


Poetics

Rhetoric

Marcus Tullius Cicero

Epistulae ad Atticum

Pro Caelio

In Catilinam

De Consulatu suo

De Oratore

De Inventione

Pro M~urena

De Officiis

Orator

Partitiones Oratoriae

Pro Sulla

Gaius Plinius Secundus

Naturalis Historia

Marcus Fabius Quintilianus

Institutio Oratoria

Rhetor ad Herennium (Rhetorica ad Herennium)

Gaius Sallustius Crispus

Catilinae

lugurtha









Vestal Virgins (4. 13), who devote their lives to the service of the gods. These vile men are

criminals (1.33, 2. 19), traitors (1.33, 2.29), and collectively, a pestis deadly to the republic (1.11,

30). All of Cicero's labels relate these men to parasites, who thrive by harming the "body"

(literally and metaphorically) that sustains them.

According to Cicero, the gods were displeased with the conspirators' blatant disregard for

their worship and impious ambition for the destruction of their sacred places. These men would

receive from the gods, therefore, the due penalty of their error. Because of their irreverence, they

would bring pestem upon themselves (1.2, 33); be given "eternal tortures" (aeternis suppliciis,

1.33); suffer punishment (poena, 2. 11, 3.15, 4.6; vindicandum, 4.6; supplicium, 1.33, 3.22, 4.7),

"destr-uction" (pernicies, 1.33), "doom" (fatum, 2. 11), "hatred" (odium: 3.22); and eventually, for

many of them, meet death (damdddddddd~~~~~~~~~nati 4.5; mors, 4.7; mortis poenamn, 4.7). In the end, the gods

actively thwarted the conspirators (3.22) and redirected the fatum that these men had planned for

the republic (3.1) back onto themselves. And so Cicero could confidently assert that it was he-

and not Lentulus-who had been tr-uly destined (fatalem) to interpret the signs of the gods, since

he had, by his reverence, procured their divine favor (4.2).

The Temple of Concord

Cicero delivers his fourth and final Catilinarian to the senate assembled in the Temple of

Concord. The setting of this speech was, as with the other orations, explicitly suited to the

purpose of his rhetoric, which in this case aimed at unifying the senate (or inspiring Concordd," if

you will)226 in a course of action against the conspirators. Cicero believed that the senate held







226 COnCOrdia ordinual was Cicero's ordained political policy. See Eagle (1949) 15; Butler (2002) 99.









CHAPTER 5
DIVINE OVERSIGHT

Religion in Speech-Making

Exclamations invoking the gods, such as O di inanortales! (Catil. 1.9) and nzehercule!i

(1.17) typically appear in oratory for dramatic effect. Cicero uttered these words in his first

speech to the senate and declared similar sentiments when he spoke to them again in his fourth

speech (per deos inanortales!, 4.1; di inanortales!, 4.15). However, when Cicero appeared

before the people in Catil. 2 and 3, he appealed to the gods in a more lengthy manner. He

entreated them, offered up his thanks, criticized the false religion of his enemies, and convinced

his audience that divine intervention and oversight had played a vital role in the republic's

salvation--a view that even the senate came to share. This effect suggests that religious

allusions, even within seemingly innocuous exclamations, were part of Cicero' s overall

persuasive strategy, and should not be overlooked.

Ancient rhetoricians list the "authority of the gods" as the first commonplace to be used in

ansplificatio, for "the raising of the individual case to a question of general concern, and for the

stirring up of the emotions.""' They also include the gods among subj ects effective for use in

the exordium, or beginning of a speech, to make listeners "benevolus, attentus, docilis."l7

Cicero introduces three of his extant speeches in this way, although he more frequently, as

Heibges points out, appeals to religious feeling in the peroratio, or conclusion, of his

speeches.17 While we cannot fairly deduce Cicero's religious beliefs from speeches intended to

persuade, e.g. the Catilinarians, what mattered most was how the audience perceived his beliefs,



177 Rhet. Her. 2.48: Anv. 1.101.

'7s Heibges (1969) 835. Cf. Av. 1.20-3; Cf. Rhet. Her. 1.6.

1"9 See Heibges (1969) for Cicero's various applications of religion within his speeches.









It is likely that Cicero would have "utilized his network" of personal amnici and clients to

help manage his public image.Iso The patron-client relationship was very important in the

gathering and dispensation of information throughout Rome s1-in elections especially, the elite

(amnici) held enough influence over public opinion to determine outcomes. 152 CiceoO could

therefore rely on his powerful friends and associates to provide him with a supplementary means

of image control. Despite this advantage, he still shouldered the primary burden of establishing

and maintaining his reputation before the people. For this purpose then he ascended the rostra, to

craft his image as the preeminent leader of the day.

A Visionary Consul

Cicero sought first to recommend the superiority of his vision. Thus, on the 8th Of

November he convened the senate in a place that provided him with prominent visual aids: the

Temple of Jupiter Stator. This setting, staunchly encircled by armed knights whom he had

commissioned,153 allowed Cicero to show the senators what he had already seen for himself:

Nihilne te nocturnum praesidium Palati, nihil urbis vigiliae, nihil timor populi, nihil
concursus bonorum omnium, nihil hic munitissimus habendi senatus locus, nihil horum ora
voltusque moverunt? (1.1)

Cicero recalls the scenery of their situation as he addresses Catiline. The senators have seen the

armed guards standing night watch on the Palatine (near which they are convened); they have

witnessed the fear that has seized the people; and they have just observed the loyal citizens who

are assembled outside the temple.154 CiceoO then alludes to the imagery of their immediate


150 Laurence (1994) 66.

151 Laurence (1994) 64ff.

152 Laurence (1994) 67.
153 MacDonald (1977) 18. Cf. Catil. 1.6.
154 The loud i of all honest men" (concursus bonorum omnium) consisting of equites and cives is clearly situated
outside the temple in 1.21, where Cicero describes the equites as honestissimi and optimi, and the cives as fortissimi









since this determined the impression his speech made. So whatever his beliefs actually were, he

would have known how to use the gods within his speech to influence the audience in his favor.

Cicero understood how critical it was for the orator to adapt his methods to his audience.lso

He knew, too, the importance of conveying the emotion he wished to stir up in his audience; so if

he desired to stir up religious feeling, he had to first demonstrate it himself." As we will see, he

depended very much upon "invoking [this] patriotic religious fervor" in Catil. 2 and 3,182 though

there are some who suspect that the lavish attention he devotes to the gods was really his way of

playingn] on the credulity of the common people," who were altogether less "sophisticated"

than the senate.183 In truth, Cicero would not have used religious allusions unless he was certain

that they would resonate, being "latent" in the minds and hearts of his listeners.18s4 This did not

necessarily mean, however, that the senate was less inclined to believe in the divine intervention

of the gods. Since Cicero employed religious imagery throughout all four of his Catilinarian

orations, he must have had a persuasive reason for doing so.

In this final chapter, we will examine how Cicero employs visual imagery to convince his

audience of the gods' protection and guidance during the conspiracy. In the Temple of Jupiter

Stator, the Forum, and the Temple of Concord, Cicero exploits the religious connotations of his

surroundings to validate his god-given authority of leadership, and also attacks the pseudo-

religion of his enemies to discredit their impious ambitions. Once he convinces the senate and

the people that his divine partnership is responsible for the republic's salvation, he strives to


'so De Orat. 2.336-7; Or. 24.

'81 De Orat. 2.189-96; Or. 132. Cf. Grube (1962) 252; Clarke (1996) 78-9.

182 Fantham (1997) 114.

183 MacDonald (1977) 124 n. a. Cf. Heibges (1969) 845.

184 Heibges (1969) 848. Cf. Taylor (1949) 78.












TABLE OF CONTENTS


page

ACKNOWLEDGMENT S .............. ...............4.....


LIST OF FIGURES .............. ...............7.....


LI ST OF AB BREVIAT IONS ............. ...... .__ ...............8...


Classical Authors and Works............... ...............8..
Classical Journals............... ...............9


AB S TRAC T ............._. .......... ..............._ 10...


CHAPTER


1 CICERO ON RHETORIC ................. ...............11......... .....


The Orator's Devices ................. ...............11......... .....
Interpretati on ................. .......... ...............15.....
Setting of the Catilinarians ................. ...............18....... ....


2 THE ENEMY PERCEIVED .............. ...............21....


Introducti on ............. ........... ...............21....
A Portrait of Catiline .............. ...............22....
Associates of Catiline .............. ...............26....

Conspiracy as Pestis .............. ...............32....

3 A RAVAGED RES P UBLICA ........._.__....... .__. ...............36..


Res Publica at Risk ............. ...... .__ ...............36..

Rumor and Report............... ...............3 8
Fail ed Pl ots .............. ...............40....
Slaves and Gladiators .............. ...............42....

Slaughter, Arson, and Looting................ ...............43
Evidence in Hand............... ...............46..


4 THE CONSUL SEES ALL .............. ...............55....


The Importance of Ethos .............. ...............57....
Maintaining Appearances .............. ...............60....
A Visionary Consul .............. ...............61....
Imperator Togatus ............. ..... .__ ...............64....
Savior of the Republic ........._ ........_. ...............67...










combined effect of these techniques helped to achieve what the Greeks referred to as enaigeia.

This palpabilityy" or "vividness," as the word translates, is highly effective in etching the "facts"

in the listeners' imaginations through word-pictures--the verbal equivalent of "showing" as

opposed to "telling."14 CiceoO relished the visually potent effect that recreated scenes before the

very eyes of his audiences. Quintilian, moreover, emphasizes how enargeia, "makes us seem not

so much to narrate as to exhibit the actual scene, while our emotions will be no less actively

stirred than if we were present at the actual occurrence.'"' Through its "vivid effect," enargeia

contributes to the overall persuasiveness of a speech, with an aim toward influencing behavior.16

As will be shown, Cicero did not haphazardly inj ect imagery into his speeches; he was critically

mindful of the appropriate usage of oratorical devices and technique. Thus, he had a distinct

purpose for every image and manipulated their scale according to his obj ectives.l

This study will attempt to show how Cicero' s use of vivid imagery is integral to his

persuasive strategy in the Catilinarians. An examination of the literary and rhetorical devices

within the speeches, coupled with a survey of Cicero' s rhetorical theories as promoted in the De

Oratore, lends support to the argument that Cicero liberally and deliberately employs images of

sight and perception (which, for the purpose of this paper, is also referred to as visual imagery)

to accomplish four distinct yet interconnected goals with his speeches. First (1), Cicero

dramatizes his enemy. He encourages his listeners to view Catiline as a wicked conspirator,


magnification. As will be discussed in a later chapter, devices of scale change easily become devices of scale
manipulation, a form of power.

14 Corbett (1965) 319. Cf. Fantham (GI r 14 272. Cicero mentions the same in De Orat. 3.160-61: oinnis translation,
quae quidein sunipta ratione est, ad sensus ipsos adinovetur, inaxiine oculoruin, qui est sensus acerrinuts... illa vero
oculoruin iulto acriora, quae paene ponunt in conspectus animi, quae cernere et videre non possuinus.

'5 Inst. 6.2.32. Translation borrowed from Corbett (1965) 27.

'6Mueller (1995) 293.

'7 See Lanham note above (n. 13) regarding the impact of "scale change."










togatus, he will defeat these vices with the "least commotion" (minimo motu) and "without a

disturbance" (nullo tumulto), effectually suppressing the bellum intestinum ac domesticum post

hominum memoriamn crudelissimum et maximum (" greatest and most savage civil war in the

memory of mankind"). Such an accomplishment could be said to rival the bloody victories of

Pompey, he suggests later in 3.26 and 4.20-22.166

When Cicero appeared at the consular elections in 63 with armed bodyguards and a

breastplate showing beneath his toga, he was prepared, at least outwardly, to defend himself

against Catiline. He had been informed that Catiline was intending to assassinate him at the

elections, but when he summoned the senate to apprise them of the threat his concerns were

disregarded. Not one to be ignored, Cicero devised this spectacle as a way to alert the public and

also, incidentally (or not?), prefigured the "quasi-military role" he would assume in suppressing

the conspiracy.167 He appeared then, literally, as the imperator togatus. Cicero would recycle

this theme in other speeches,16 but ultimately he hoped to be remembered for his glorious

leadership in saving the republic.

Savior of the Republic

Cicero' s evolutionary j ourney from mere consul to "visionary" and "civilian general"

takes him, upon the successful capture of several of Catiline' s top men, to the rank of "savior."

He opens the Third Catilinarian with joyful proclamation, announcing that the republic, the lives

and properties of all, and the empire itself were that very day "rescued" (ereptamtt~~~~~ttttt~~~~ 3.1) and

"preserved" (conserva~~ttttam)t~~~~ttt from fire and sword, thanks to his personal sacrifices. He speaks too



166 Habicht (1990) 39-40.

167 Steel (2001) 168.

168 See Pro Mur. 84 and Sul. 85. He also reflects on these events in Off: 1.77 and in the poem he wrote
commemorating his consulship, Cons. ~fr. 57-65.










Metaphor has a tradition extending from the ancient world. Aristotle, in the earliest extant

discussion of metaphor, outlined its types and functions in his Poetics.8 Cicero would take up

the topic later in book three of his De Oratore, in which he defined metaphor as a "form of

simile abbreviated to a single word and offering pleasure from the recognition of likeness."9 He

then outlines four reasons why people appreciate metaphor: it is a mark of natural talent; it gives

intellectual stimulation; it offers a compressed identification (in a single word) of both terms of

comparison; and it provides sensual and visual stimulation.10 In fact, he notes how metaphor

appeals especially to the sense of sight, the "keenest of senses."ll Such a point could hardly

escape an orator' s notice, since it was his j ob to capture the minds of his listeners. Thus

metaphor, in addition to its value as a literary device, had powerful application as a rhetorical

device in antiquity.

Cicero's works dealing with rhetoric, particularly the De Oratore, confirm that Cicero was

well versed in stylistic devices such as metaphor and, likewise, thoroughly acquainted with

imagery. 12 He knew, as an accomplished speaker, that with a sleight of tongue he could

manipulate the emotions of his audience. He understood, as a rhetorician, that by scaling down

his images via metonomy or synecdoche, he could intensify the drama of his speech. 13 The total



SPoet. 21-2.

9 De. Orat. 3.157. May (2001) 270 n. 195 stresses the difficulties with this passage and opts for deletion.
Translation is from Innes (1988) 316.

10 De Orat. 3.159-61.

"Ibid. 3.160: vel quod omnis translation, quae quidem sumpta ratione est, ad sensus ipsos admovetur, maxime
oculorum, qui est sensus acerrimus.

12 Ibid. 3.156-65; cf. Orat. 39.137-39; see also the contemporaneous Rhet. Her. 4.34.45, 4.39.51, and Quintilian's
later comments in Inst. 8.6.4-28. Cicero also composed a good deal of poetry, though he is not especially renowned
for his efforts. See W.W. Ewbank, The Poems of Cicero (London 1933).

13 For scale change see Lanham (1991) 102 and 148 (entries "Metonomy" and "Synecdoche"). In short, this scale
change is accomplished when experience is described in terms of other experience, but at a different level of












5 DIVINE OVERSIGHT .............. ....._.. ...............72.....


Religion in Speech-Making .............. ...............72....
Jupiter' s Providentia ............._. ..... ___ ...............74...
His Tem ple .............. ...............74....
Hi s Statue ............. ...... ...............77....
Other Portents ............. ...... ._ ...............84....

The Temple of Concord ............. ...... ._ ...............88...


6 CONSTRUCTION OF A POLITICAL "REALITY" ............. ...............94.....


LIST OF REFERENCES ................. ...............96___ ......


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .........____ .......___........101......









conflict, Cicero asserts, the di ipsi immortales will certainly, even if men' s zeal wanes, ensure

that good triumphs over evil. Finally, in 2.29, Cicero testifies to the oversight of the gods, whose

omens (significationibus) continue to guide his leadership. The gods will, he believes, defend

their temples (sua temple) in person by their divine will and might (suo numine atque auxilio);

nevertheless, he encourages the people to pray, worship, and beseech (precari, venerari,

implorare) the gods for their continued protection. At the conclusion of this speech, the people

would have had the distinct impression, because of Cicero' s portrayal, that the gods' favor would

ultimately secure the republic from harm.

Having established this idea of the gods' intervention in the minds of his audience,

Cicero was then considerably advantaged when the arrest and indictment of several of Catiline' s

men appeared to demonstrate the truth of his assertions. It only made sense for Cicero, therefore,

in announcing his special role in saving the republic, also to pay homage to the gods--and in

particular, to Jupiter--for their preservation of the city. Cicero's focus in Third Catilinarian is,

according to Millar, "unique .. in putting so much emphasis on the role of the gods."200

Kennedy too notes the "religious element" so pervasive throughout the speech.201 In order to put

all of this religious language into perspective, it is helpful to visualize the location where Cicero

delivered this third speech:

The audience facing the Rostra would have seen the speaker, then, flanked by .. statues
and monuments and against the backdrop of the enlarged Curia of Sulla. To the east stood
the Basilica Aemilia; to the west, behind Sulla' s Tabularium, rose the twin heights of the
Capitoline Hill: the Capitolium, which included the sacred precinct of Jupiter Optimus
Maximus, and the Arx, the most prominent building of which was the Temple of Juno
Moneta.202


200 Millar (1998) 109.

201 Kennedy (1972) 180.

202 Vasaly (1993) 68.









.. the potency of political language does not stem from its descriptions of a "real" world
but rather from its reconstructions of the past and its evocation of unobservables in the
present and of potentialities in the future, [thus] language usage is strategic. It is always
part of a course of action to enable ~~e60ple to live with themselves and with what they do
and to marshall support for causes"

Cicero's language, with its emphasis on what had been seen and what could therefore be

foreseen, was vastly effective in convincing the Roman people of the conspiracy's threat. While

his "embroidery" on this theme is undeniably a meshing of the real and the imagined,12 he

imprinted vivid images of "unobservables" and "potentialities" upon his listeners' minds in an

appeal to pathos, that they might be "moved in such a way as to be ruled by some strong

emotional impulse rather than by reasoned judgment."128

Persuading Rome of a conspiracy required concentrated effort and a methodically refmned

rhetoric; but this persuasion was not accomplished by pathos alone. As Cicero developed his

argument against the conspirators based on the destruction they devised for the city, he was at

the same time promoting his own authority, or ethos, in accordance with his view that "nothing

in oratory...is more important than for the orator to be favorably regarded by the audience."12

As we will see in the next chapter, Cicero anticipated their need for guidance in the mounting

crisis, and cleverly adapted his rhetoric to recommend himself as Rome's foremost leader, whose

superior vision had exposed the "behind-the scenes machinations" of the conspiracy to all.130




126 Edelman (1988) 108.

127 Vasaly (1993) 78.

128 Cic. De Orat. 2.178: moveatur, ut impeto quodam animi et perturbatione magis quam iudicio aut consilio
regatur. Translation quoted from May and Wisse (2001) 170.
129 Ibid: nihil est enim in dicendo,... maius, quam ut faveat oratori is [qui audiet] .. Translation is from May and
Wisse (2001) 170.

130 Butler (2002) 98. Cf. Cic. Catil. 1.2; 2.1; 3.2. Cicero expresses similar thoughts in the poem he later wrote about
his consulship, de Consulatu suo 57-65.










Webb, R. 1997. "Imagination and the Arousal of the Emotions in Greco-Roman Rhetoric." In
The Passions in Roman Thought and Literature, edited by S.M. Braund and C. Gill, pp.
112-27. Cambridge.

Wilkins, A.S., ed. 1989. M~ Tulli Ciceronis Rhetorica, Tonaus I: Libros De Oratore Tres. Oxford.

Wood, N. 1988. Cicero 's Social and Political Thought. Berkeley.

Wordsworth, W. 2004. "I Wandered Lonely As a Cloud." In William Wolt\; 1, en t Selected
Poents. Edited by S. Gill. London.

Yavetz, Z. 1963. "The Failure of Catiline' s Conspiracy." Historia 12: 485-99.

-.Yavetz, Z. 1988. Slaves and Slavery in Ancient Rome. New Brunswick.

Yeats, W.B. 2002. "Under Ben Bulben." In W B. Yeats: SelectedPoents. Edited by J. Kelly.
London.









Cicero was, in fact, petitioning Jupiter from the very same spot where Romulus had

"prayed for the intercession of the same god at a moment of similarly grave danger to the

continued existence of the city." In so doing, he "implicitly assumes" the role of a new Romulus

who had come to rescue the city in its distress. 195 CiceoO's speech would have been made all the

more dramatic since, in addressing Jupiter, he likely gestured to the statue of the god which

would have "dominated" the interior of the temple in which they were assembled.196

Cicero forecasts that Catiline, in waging an "impious war" (impium bellum), will only

bring upon himself the pestis that he thinks to inflict on the republic (1.33). He then closes with

a warning to Catiline and all who had partnered with him in his conspiracy. Though they may sit

his temple now, Jupiter the Stator of Rome will keep them far away from it and from all other

temples (a tuis certerisque templis) in the future--of that, Cicero is certain. He closes with an

expectant prayer for retribution, trusting that Jupiter will recompense the conspirators'

irreverence with eternal punishment.

His Statue

In Jupiter' s temple Cicero was easily able to exploit the site of his speech to "embellish

its persuasiveness."19 He accomplished this by focusing on the symbolic significance of his

location, though his allusions would not have been quite so spectacular without the imposing

image of Jupiter that stood as a statue within the temple. Understanding the power of the visual,

Cicero would rely, likewise, on the "potent visual aids" afforded by the Roman Forum to

enhance the illustrative energy of his speeches to the people.198 The most impressive of these


195 Vasaly (1993) 53.
196 Ibid. 50-1.

197 Aldrette (1999) 25.
198 Ibid.










Edwards, C. 1993. The Politics oflmmorality in Ancient Rome. Cambridge.

Ewbank, W.W. 1933. The Poems of Cicero. London.

Everitt, A. 2003. Cicero: The Life and Times ofRome 's Greatest Politician. New York.

Fantham, E. 1997. "The Contexts and Occasions of Roman Public Rhetoric." In Roman
Eloquence: Rhetoric in Society and Literature, edited by W.J. Dominik. London.

-.2004. The Roman World of Cicero 's De Oratore. Oxford.

Gould, H.E. and J.L. Whiteley, eds. 1982. Cicero: In Catilinam I & II. Bristol.

Griffin, M.T. and E.M. Atkins, trans. 1991. Cicero: On Duties. Cambridge.

Grube, G.M.A. 1962. "Educational, Rhetorical, and Literary Theory in Cicero." Phoenix 16.4:
234-57.

Gruen, E.S. 1974. The Last Generation of the Roman Republic. Berkeley.

-.1969. "Notes on the First Catilinarian Conspiracy." CPh 64:1: 20-24.

Habicht, C. 1990. Cicero the Politician. Baltimore.

Hadas, M. 1952. A History of Latin Literature. New York.

Hardy, E.G. 1924. "The Catilinarian Conspiracy in Its Context: A Re-study of the Evidence."
Oxford.

Harsh, P.W. 1955. "The Intriguing Slave in Greek Comedy." TAPhA 86: 135-42.

Heibges, U. 1969. "Religion and Rhetoric in Cicero's Speeches." Latomus 28: 833-49.

Innes, D. 1988. "Cicero on Tropes." Rhetorica 6.3: 307-25.

Kennedy, G.A. 1972. The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World, 300 B.C.-A.D. 300. Princeton.

Konstan, D. 1993. "Rhetoric and the Crisis of Legitimacy in Cicero' s Catilinarian Orations." In
Rethinking the History ofRhetoric: M\~ultidisciplinary Essays on the Rhetorical Tradition,
edited by T. Poulakos, pp. 11-30. Boulder.

Lanham, R.A. 1991. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms, 2nd ed. Berkeley.

Laurence, R. 1994. "Rumour and Communication in Roman Politics." G&R 41.1: 62-74.

Leeman, A.D. 1986. Orationis Ratio: The Stylistic Theories and Practice of the Roman Orators
Historians and Philosophers, vol. 1. Amsterdam.









into poverty; (4) financially-ailing businessmen whose laziness and luxurious habits have

brought about their ruin; (5) criminals of every sort; and (6) debauched and decadent young men,

representing Catiline's inner circle. Significantly, the common denominator among the men in

the first four groups is financial insecurity resulting from debt. Hardy notes this as well,

insisting, "That there were many disaffected elements .. -to whom Catiline's propaganda of

social and, above all, financial relief might appeal--is certain."68 CiceoO points to the swiftness

with which Catiline had collected a vast number of such ruined men, a force whose sheer size

(ingentent nunterunt, 2.8) heightened their perceived threat. It is evident in his portrayal of these

desperate men that he recognized Catiline's appeal to the oppressed.

The motivation for both classes--slaves, whose enslavement meant physical bondage, and

senators, whose enslavement was to debt--to join with Catiline was the promise of freedom.69

Certainly, slaves figured in among the criminal element of group five, while the senators Cicero

suspected of treasonous activity fit in with groups one and two. Inherent in freedom, however,

was a license that would appeal to men within all six groups: the license to pursue pleasure, free

from financial worries.

In his De Officiis, Cicero explains his disapprobation of men who shamelessly follow their

pleasures, likening them to animals.70 He further contrasts, "how dishonorable it is to sink into

luxury and to live a soft and effeminate lifestyle, but how honorable to live thriftily, strictly, with

self-restraint, and soberly."n Cicero depicts Catiline's friends as possessing no scruples of their

own. Indeed they appear, as he describes them, with all the trappings of decadence and the



68 Hardy (1924) 52.

69 Bradley (1978) 335.

"0 Off: 1.105-6
71 Translation from Griffin and Atkins (1991) 42.









invoking for dramatic effect the voice of the patria for corroboration (1.18).

Cicero's allusions to this "highly charged ambiance" within the temple (and in the city at

large) serve, in the words of Vasaly:

.. to focus the attention of his listeners on the crisis that was being played out
before their eyes. Everything they saw and heard around them became a perceptible
demonstration of Cicero' s contentions .. Most of all, such scenes become a visible
sign of Catiline' s alienation from the city and its inhabitants, an isolation so complete
that now the very light and air of Rome could no longer hold any pleasure for him56


What then is left for Catiline to do? Just as he would accept estrangement from his own parents

if reconciliation were impossible and withdraw somewhere away from their oculis, so he should

admit alienation from the patria, the common parent of them all, and do likewise (1.17).

Cicero' s feminine personification and prosopopoeia of the patria (in 1.18) makes Catiline' s

crimes against the state, the communis parens, seem most insidious and provides yet another

"eyewitness testimony" of a man so depraved that he would betray his own mother.

In this first speech to the senate, Cicero reinterprets Catiline's appearance and actions to

his detriment. He invites the audience to see firsthand the guilt in his eyes, hands, and in his

entire body. He also reminds them of Catiline's behavior that the senate had observed that very

day. Through his appraisal of Catiline' s behavior, the senate clearly sees Catiline' s evident

disregard for Rome and her people.

Associates of Catiline

As if Catiline' s dark portraiture were not sufficiently revealing, Cicero turns next to

depicting the accomplices to Catiline's evil endeavors. That there existed certain "disaffected

elements" to whom Catiline's agenda of social reform and Einancial relief might appeal is well




56 Vasaly (1993) 50.









Furthermore, his act prefigured a major theme for Cicero's term of office: cedantdddd~~~~~~~dddddd arma togae.35

Cicero, the imperator togatus ("general dressed in the toga"), would overcome the conspiracy of

Catiline, not with swords, but with the mighty artillery of his words.36

Catiline's reputation prior to Cicero's public display was undoubtedly negative. Though

records of his alleged first conspiracy in 66-65 BC are clouded by uncertainty, invective, and

propaganda,37 his regular prosecution in court (despite subsequent acquittals) was enough to

warrant bad press.38 What is clear is that by late 63 BC Catiline had become involved in illegal

revolutionary activities that, as Everitt suggests, may have originated as a "secret alliance around

a radical programme" of land redistribution and debt cancellation.39 Whatever threat Catiline's

conspiracy posed in actuality, the movement itself was indicative of widespread discontent with

the current political/social system.40 Such an atmosphere begged for a leader, and the politically

dead-ended Catiline saw it as a golden opportunity.

Cicero, however, was consul at the time and as the rightfully elected leader would hardly

ignore Catiline's rumored machinations. Instead Cicero would wield his power less

conspicuously than Catiline, although his political office granted him considerable official and

unofficial authority. Rather than take up arms, he would report the events.

The consul's oculi et aures would appraise the situation in Rome. What he saw and heard,

he would convey to the senate and the people with imagery so vivid that his listeners could

O5ff 1.77.

36 May (1988) 57. This theme will be discussed in chapter 4.

37Everitt (2003) 90-1; Ramsey (1982) 131; Phillips (1976) 441; Gruen (1969) 21: Seager (1964) 342. Much of the
invective came from Cicero's In Toga Candida, what fragments we have are preserved by Asconius 82-94 C. For
this speech, see Crawford (1994) 159-99.

38MacDonald (1977) 3-6.

39 Everitt (2003) 101.

40Hadas (1952) 114).










Having at long last a group of culprits in custody after the ambush, Cicero did not delay

in revealing the identities of the men whom he suspected of covert involvement in the

conspiracy--namely, Gabinius, Statilius, Cethegus, and Lentulus (3.6). He summoned these

four men and called directly for a meeting of the senate--an action he affirms that many in his

audience had witnessed (ut vidistis, 3.6-7). In the interim, he sent another praetor, Gaius

Sulpicius, to conduct a search of Cethegus' house, following a tip from the Allobroges (3.8).

Cicero also notes how easily the reported stockpile of deadly weapons, consisting of sicae and

gladii ("daggers" and "swords"), was recovered from Cethegus' residence.

Cicero then transports his audience to the senate meeting where, according to his account,

Volturcius was the first to testify (3.8). Under duress, but doubtless encouraged by a guarantee

of immunity, Volturcius implicated Lentulus in the conspiracy, claiming that Lentulus had given

him instructions and sent him with a letter (littera~s) for Catiline. Cicero obviously paraphrases

his testimony, 113 highlighting certain details--Catiline' s anticipated use of slaves in his march

against Rome (servorum presidio uteretur), and his plans for fire and slaughter throughout the

city (incendissent caedemque.. .fecissent)--that correspond to the rumored tales he had portrayed

as inevitable fact. Furthermore, these plans had been descriptum ("apportioned," or more

literally, "written down"), by which Cicero means "to conjure in the minds of his listeners the

specter of a written plan, perhaps even a map."114 His allusion to this yet undisclosed document

outlining the destruction of the city evokes a visual image that lends additional weight to his

case.


113 Butler (2002) 95.
114 Ibid.









Cicero (Dis ego immortalibus ducibus hanc mentem voluntatemque suscepi: "I undertook this

plan and purpose with the immortal gods as my leaders"), who in turn guided the people (togati

me uno togato duce et imperatore vicistis: "you civilians conquered with one civilian, me, as

your leader and general," 3.23) to victory over the conspiracy. As Cicero stands there speaking

atop the Rostra, he becomes the intermediary--both physically and figuratively-between the

people and their gods.216

Other Portents

There were additional visible signs from the gods, besides the coincidental appearance of

Jupiter' s statue, which Cicero mentions in the Catilinarians. Some of these signs he connects

with the conspiracy, interpreting them as early warnings from the gods that trouble would befall

the city. Others of these signs he associates with the bogus religion of his enemies who had

hoped to use the illusion of divine help to further their irreligious enterprise. As Cicero reviews

these portents with his audience, he discloses their meaning with this symbolic message: that the

gods offer protection to those who are reverent, but punish those who are irreverent.

In 3.18-20, Cicero recalls several portents that, he claims, foretold of an imminent threat

to the republic. There were "fires from the west at nighttime" (nocturno tempore ab occidente

faces, 3.18) and a "brightness of the sky" (ardore[m] caeli)--apparitions which can probably be

attributed to astronomical phenomena, such as a meteor shower (a rare occurance in central

Italy). There was also the "throwing of lightning" (fulminum iactus), a sign that would have, by

association, conjured up the image of Jupiter, the "thrower" of lightning. Cicero speaks too of

earthquakes terraee motus: "movements of the earth") and alludes to other unspecified portents

that occurred during the time of his consulship. In the guise of omitting or passing over all of



216 Taylor (1949) 87.









Slaves and Gladiators

Additional strong evidence of Catiline's intent to overthrow the government stems from

the report (promulgated by Cicero) that fugitive slaves had joined Catiline' s camp. 101 As

discussed in the previous chapter, the threat of a slave insurrection struck terror into the hearts of

Roman citizens, whose recollection of Spartacus' revolt of the previous decade was still fresh.

Though Cicero refers to slaves only once in his first speech, characterizing Catiline as an

evocatorem servorum, or "recruiter of slaves" (1.27), in his second speech to the people, Cicero

employs the slave motif with a bit more drama, emphasizing Catiline' s intimate dealings with

gladiatores (2.7,9), slaves whose very name identifies them as "the ones brandishing swords."102

He readily envisions the gladiator and fugitivus plundering wealthy estates (2.19). He even

foresees the days of battle, when gladiators contend with consuls and generals in hand-to-hand

combat (2.24), though he assures the crowd later that Roman forces would subdue this most

formidable group (2.26).

Cicero's aim, in pointing to the dangerous accumulation of slaves in Catiline's camp was,

as Yavetz concludes,

.. [to] support .. his propaganda: conflagration, burglary and the release of slaves were
all of the same cloth. It was difficult to control freed slaves in their fight against Roman
citizens, and this is the reason why Cicero's warnings bore fruit."103

By giving credence to the reports of slave involvement in Catiline's conspiracy, Cicero

reinforces his claims about the destruction that would befall the city. Fires and robberies, in the

mindset of most Romans, were the casualties to be expected when slaves roamed at large; thus



'01 Yavetz (1963) 493, however, treats the report as fact. Refer to Chapter 2, n. 22 for my summary on this topic.

102 And, of course, Spartacus and his first followers were gladiators--a historical precedent that would have made
Cicero's image even more terrifying to Cicero's audience.

103 Yavetz (1963) 495.
































O 2007 Angela Brook Miller Reed









time. We will see in the next chapter how Cicero obtains divine sanction for his actions by

portraying himself, like Romulus, as the agent of the gods.










prized in antiquity.24 In the modem era, the "artist" and the "scholar" tend to be consigned to

separate realms; the man who attempts to be both the one and the other often endangers his

credibility (American society in particular tends to reinforce this dichotomy).

Despite the limitations inherent in the text, the language of oratory and rhetoric "is not to

be looked through, as if to find some other 'reality' underneath, but looked at, for it is the stuff of

Roman political transactions."25 COTTOSpondingly, it is best to withhold judgment on rhetorical

methods that seem theatrical, proud, or demeaning; Cicero was a man of the ancient world--not

the modem--therefore he speaks more authoritatively than the modem reader concerning issues

and events of his day.26 Let the reader, then, dispense with efforts to "read between the lines" (as

the saying goes). Let him instead appreciate the text of the speeches as a literary encapsulation

of the political drama of a moment in time. Therein lies the value of these oratorical texts.

As early as 60 BC, Cicero described his consular orations of 63 BC as offering a model for

study by Roman youths.27 In fact, Quintilian found the First Catilinarian2 to be a ripe source of

rhetorical exemplar, as evidenced by seventeen quotations from the speech that appear in books

eight and nine of his Institutio Oratoria.28 His use of the speech as a model for teaching

principles of oratory as well as Cicero's own expectation that his consular speeches be employed

in pedagogy suggests that it is appropriate for modem readers to approach the Catilinarians

likewise. We must view them, not as a perfect transcript of events but, rather, as a demonstration



24 Rawson (1972) 45. Atticus expressed similar thoughts, according to 4tt. 14.14.5 and 16.13.2, which Cicero
champions later in De Orat. 2.36. See D. S. Potter (1999) 135-38 for the negotiation between fact and style in the
ancient historian' s presentation of events.

25Cape (1995) 256.

26 May (2002) 50; Cf. Nisbet (1965) 62.

47 tt. 2.1.3.

28Leeman (1986) 133.









visual and perceptible." In essence, Cicero is here laying out the theme and "avowed purpose"

of the Third Catilinarian: "to inform the people of the incontrovertible evidence that had at long

last been secured,"112 which they could now see with their own eyes (cum oculis, 3.4).

Cicero wastes little time leading into his account of how the plots came to be "detected,

revealed, and displayed" (comperta, patefacta, inlustrata; 3.3). When he discovered that Publius

Lentulus had talked with the envoys of the Allobroges in an attempt to involve them in the

conspiracy, Cicero knew that his opportunity to share the "full disclosure" of events was within

grasp (manifesto; 3.5). He staged an ambush for the night of December 2nd, sending the praetors

Lucius Flaccus and Gaius Pomptinus with a contingent of armed men to intercept the

Allobrogian envoys, who were accompanied by Titus Volturcius, at the Mulvian Bridge (3.5).

Cicero anticipated that they would have in their possession a letter for Catiline--a presupposition

that was quickly verified when the ambush was conducted without incident around 3 a.m. the

next morning (3.6).

Not merely one, but in fact several letters were handed over to the praetors "with their

seals intact" (integris signis). From the moment of their seizure, Cicero handles these letters

with utmost delicacy, careful not to invalidate the contents with even the slightest suggestion of

their being compromised. To this end, he shares how the letters were delivered to his home early

that morning and, once news of the ambush had spread, many distinguished citizens gathered in

his home to see the evidence for themselves; but he refused to open the letters at their urging

(3.7). Despite their concern that he might embarrass himself if the contents prove benign, Cicero

expressed confidence in his own intuition, choosing to subj ect himself to charges of excessive

zeal rather than risk disqualifying the evidence by tampering with it.


112 Vasaly (1993) 75-76.










manifestation of a god."209 Literally then, it seems that the people could behold Jupiter there

"with [their own] eyes" (oculis, 3.18).210

Cicero directs the audience' s attention to this statue in 3.20 (illud signum quod videtis:

"that statue that you see") and explains how its particular orientation was in keeping with the

recommendation of the soothsayers (haruspices, 3.19), who believed that by facing it eastward--

toward the rising sun, the Forum, and the Senate house--the secret plots of the conspirators

would be illuminated (inlustrarentur), and therefore visible (ut .. perspici possunt) to all.

Having just revealed the truth of the conspiracy to them (in 3.5-15), as Jupiter had revealed it to

him, Cicero highlights the propitiousness of the statue's appearance that very day. He wonders

(3.21), since they had witnessed this omen for themselves, how any of them could disbelieve that

the gods were, by their "will and might" (nutu ac potestate), sustaining Rome when there were

so many evidences (haec omnia quae videmus) that indicated divine involvement. He laments

that some could be "so turned from the truth" (tamtttttttt~~~~~~~~~ adversus a vero). Cicero plays on the theme

of the visual here by presenting a contrast between Jupiter who, by seeing, illumines truth and

those who, by refusing to see, deny it. The consul hoped that, just as the god had enhanced his

own vision, he could help the audience to see and perceive what they could not, thereby

revealing the truth that had been hidden from their view.211

This truth, according to Cicero (3.21), is that the statue's re-erection early that morning,

while the conspirators were led through the Forum to the senate meeting, signified the direct

intervention of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, whose temple was in the vicinity. What could be


209 Aldrette (1999) 26.

210 It is possible that there was another statue of Jupiter (that would have "loomed" over the audience), as well as a
statue of the god Apollo erected on the Capitolium. Pliny mentions these statues in HN 34.39-40. See also Vasaly
(1993) 68-9 n. 57.
211 MOrstein-Marx (illi4) 252.










CHAPTER 2
THE ENEMY PERCEIVED

Introduction

Early in his defense of Marcus Caelius in 56 BC, Cicero counters the prosecution' s

charge that Caelius had pursued familia~rita;s with the conspirator Catiline (Cael. 10-14). He

mollifies this allegation with the acknowledgment that many other men, indeed many good

patrician men, had shared an association with Catiline. To underscore his point, he admits that

Catiline had nearly deceived him--an astonishing revelation, in light of Cicero' s crucial role in

thwarting his conspiracy against the Roman Republic. 42

While Cicero readily admits to Catiline's evil side, he str-uggles to downplay the effect

that Catiline had on his client.43 His endeavor to defend Caelius demonstrates that Cicero,

though adapting his rhetoric to suit the occasion, continued to view Catiline as a narrowly

averted threat to the safety of Rome. Indeed, hi s characterizati on--given seven years after the

conspiracy in a speech where he is concerned to emphasize the positive aspects of Catiline' s

character--remains fundamentally the same as it was in his speeches of 63 BC. Granted, some

view his depiction of Catiline as "garish" or "exaggerated," and judging from the nature of

political invective, this is likely the case.44 But, as Mitchell points out, even the allegations of

invective "like all other forms of propaganda, must have some level of credibility to be

effective."45




42 Me ipsum, me, inquam, quondam paene ille decepit (Cael. 14). Whether Cicero's admission shocked his audience
as much as it presumably shocked himself is unknown; regardless, he played the part to the benefit of Caelius'
defense.

43Mitchell (1979) 222. Price (1998) 118 n.35 also comments on this "interesting spectacle."

44Everitt (2003) 90. Cf. Phillips (1976) 441.

45 Mitchell (1979) 222: "Due allowance must, of course, be made for the distortions, exaggerations, and additions of
the forensic and political invective which forms the foundation of the tradition [of Catiline's reputed character] ..









garments and skin glistening with oils (2.5), and debt-ridden, but unwilling to part with their rich

estates (2. 18) or give up their desire for power (2. 19). Cicero's allusions to these noble audience

members who were privy to the conspiracy likely indicate his anxiety about the number of

Catiline' s supporters in the Senate.61 Indeed, his display of knowledge about the secret goings-

on of the conspirators may have been intended to indicate his potential for revealing their

complicity--a bold move calculated to flush out the sympathizers from their midst.62 With each

of his examples, Cicero seems also to draw out a common theme--how appearance, or what is

visible to the eye, differs markedly from reality. Cicero's main advantage would come,

therefore, from magnifying the contradiction most apparent to all present: those entrusted with

the public safety were among the traitors to the public trust.

The very intimation of senatorial treachery made the rumors of another group alleged to

have close ties with Catiline take on enlarged significance. Cicero first alludes to this group

when he dubs Catiline the evocatorem servorum et civium perditorum, "the recruiter of slaves

and ruined citizens" (1.27). The mere suggestion that he had allied himself with slaves, a claim

affirmed by some scholars but completely dismissed by others,63 WaS a powerful image likely to

conjure up a host of negative associations, especially due to recent historical events--namely,

Spartacus' slave revolt of 73-71 BC.64 Thus, when implanting the slave motif into his speech,

Cicero well understood that his audience would unconsciously replay before their minds' eyes all

the accumulated personal experiences, rumors, tales, and horror stories to which they had been



61 Mitchell (1979) 228.

62 Price (1998) 126.

63 For acceptance of Cicero's assertion, see Mitchell (1979) 233, Yavetz (1963) 493, and Bradley (1978) 329. For
rejection, see Gruen (1974) 428-9 and MacDonald (1977) 13, 28, 60 n. a.
64 Stockton (1971) 103.










culpability."120 By relaying these visual details of the scene in his speech, Cicero stresses the

import of signa conscientiae while offering his listeners a vicarious glimpse of the conspirators,

shamefaced and confronted with their crimes.

From a tactical perspective, it is likely that Cicero exaggerated the "directness with which

the conspiracy had been revealed by the confiscated letters."121 As mediator to the people, he

had to abridge what had taken hours to unfold, in essence simplifying the evidence "for the

crowd's consumption."122 Contrary to what some have suggested, there is really no reason to

believe that he was purposely falsifying evidence, since many could have exposed him if that

were the case -but none did.123

Cicero' s major obj ective, in his addresses to the people, was to impress upon their minds

the "indelible image of the city as it might have been," had Catiline succeeded in his

conspiracy.124 Initially, Cicero had to rely on rumors and reports of the conspirator's plans in

order to help his audience appreciate the "unchanged aspect" of their city in contrast to ruined

city he depicts for them.125 But within a month of Catiline' s departure from the Rome, Cicero

was able to procure the documentary evidence requisite for substantiating his allegations. In the

wake of such convincing proof, Cicero's tales of looting, arson, bloodshed, and slave uprisings

that would accompany Catiline's rise to power assumed much greater influence with the people.

In the assessment of Edelman, this effect was easily achieved because:



120 Stockton (1971) 129.

121 Butler (2002) 96.
122 Ibid.

123 Phillips (1976) 448. Seager and Waters, in particular, have discussed Cicero's presumed deception.

124 Vasaly (1993) 77.
125 Ibid.

































Figure 1. Painting by Cesare Maccari (1840-1919), Cicero Denounces Catiline.









Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts

IMAGES, IMAGERY, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF POLITICAL "REALITY"
IN CICERO'S CA TILINARIAN ORATIONS

By

Angela Brook Miller Reed

August 2007

Chair: Lewis Sussman
Major: Latin

As a great orator and literary stylist, Marcus Tullius Cicero had a talent for employing

words to evoke vivid pictorial images. In his four orations against the conspirator L. Sergius

Catilina (In Catilinamn 1-4), Cicero employs this technique, which the Greeks called enargeia,

with the aid of certain stylistic devices and a pattern of imagery that centers around sight and

perception. This study will show how Cicero's use of such imagery, in creating a vivid "reality"

in the minds of his listeners, is integral to his persuasive strategy in the Catilinarians.

Many scholars have speculated on the historical accuracy of the events and

characterizations recorded in these four speeches; however, such disputes do not concern us here.

Rather, this study will emphasize the literary aspects of the Catilinarians through a close study

of certain stylistic techniques. This proj ect will begin by examining how Cicero' s rhetorical

theory employs imagery in persuasion. Then in the following chapters the Catilinarian orations

will be discussed in detail, with emphasis on Cicero's use of visual imagery and how it animates

his portrayal of the following: Catiline and his supporters, the insecurity of the res public,

Cicero himself, and the divine protection of the gods. The evidence reveals that Cicero's

colorful evocations are vital constituents of his construction of political "reality" and contribute

substantially to the persuasive power of his oratory.










Looting and burglaries throughout the city comprise yet another series of ruinous images

that Cicero parades before the crowd as vividly as if fact. He forecasts that, amid the havoc,

thieves (latrones; 1.33, 2.7)--under the command of that chief of bandits, Catiline (2.24)--will

descend upon the state to ransack the residences and public places of Rome. Pillagers and

plunderers (praedatores and direptores, 2.19) will swarm to the melee, pillaging the city

(latrocinium; 1.23, 27, 31), and perhaps even the city's women (rapina, 2.10).106 With or

without the conspiracy, Catiline will not be derailed; for, who can stop a man who prefers death

in the pursuit of brigandage (latrocinantem, 2. 16), to a life spent in exile? Cicero' s use of the

present active participle emphasizes how unceasingly Catiline's fatalistic obsession with banditry

has dominated his life. Despite living outside the city walls, it seems that Catiline is still

fantasizing and contriving plans to gratify his unrelenting lust for Rome's despoilment and

downfall.

In appraising Cicero's second speech, Stockton maintains that, "murder, plunder, rape,

[and] the burning of Rome are dangled before the audience' s eyes to terrify them."'o7 Clearly,

the profuse number of references in the text to these specific perils is evidence in support of his

assessment. Moreover, many of Cicero' s images appear stereotyped,los which suggests that

Cicero was cognizant of various rumors circulating at the time and realized how to exploit them



106 Rapina is an ambiguous term. Though commonly translated as "plunder" in this passage, "rape" is also an
appropriate, and in this context, relevant, translation. Rape has a long history as a weapon in times of war. In her
study of war-rape crimes in Bosnia-Herzegovnia and Croatia during the early 1990's, Olujic (1998) 39 notes the
psychological impact of rape on an entire society, how it "constitutes a physical and moral attack against women, as
well as an attack by humiliation and dishonor on the husbands, brothers, fathers, and sons of the victims." She
continues, "In war individual bodies become metaphoric representatives of the social body": thus, the raping of that
body symbolizes the raping of the individual's family, and more significantly, the society as a whole.

107 Stockton (1971) 120).

'0s Seager (1973) 242 proposes that the orator's stereotyped "tales of arson and murder in the city, of peasant
uprisings and slave revolts up and down Italy" are to be expected of one inventing a conspiracy. While an intriguing
perspective, his conclusion is difficult to defend.










established." Sallust's catalog (Cat. 14) unites Catiline with all manner of criminal and immoral

persons, many of whom were bankrupted or impoverished because of extravagant spending. His

adherents included the "descendants of the proscribed, bankrupt aristocrats, a band of

unprincipled and Bohemian young bloods, and, from the rural areas, dispossessed farmers and

Sullan veterans. ."58 In addition, Cicero suggests that Catiline's supporters came from both

high (i.e. senatorial) and low (servile) stations in life, affirming that the conspiracy was deeply

and dangerously entrenched within the walls of Rome. This reputed community of profligates

would prove a source of ample illustration for Cicero in his negative portrayal of Catiline.

For the greater part of Cicero' s first speech to the Senate, the associates of Catiline receive

minor attention. They are referred to collectively as a ca~stra .. contra populum Romanum in

1.5, though mention of their location in Italia .. in Etruriaefaucibus adds visual proximity to

the threat they represent. Cicero names certain members of the conspiracy, Gaius Manlius (1.7)

and Marcus Laeca (1.8), when recounting the so-called first Catilinarian conspiracy, 59 but offers

few details beyond their involvement as partners in the same criminal madness.60 Then Cicero

eyes the senatorial crowd, noting that he clearly sees (video enim) a few of those who were with

Catiline--men whose ambition drives them toward the destruction of Rome (1.8-9).

Cicero alludes further, though without immediate identification, to Catiline's senatorial

supporters in his Second Catilinarian. He portrays those who supported Catiline as lacking in

integrity, despite their high-born status (2.3), enemy soldiers in disguise, with their flashy purple


57Hardy (1924) 52-3. See also Edwards (1993) 178 who adopts the view that Sallust's narrative serves as a
paradigmaticc example of the terrible consequences of luxurious habits for young Romans."

58Eagle (1949) 24.
59 For further information on the alleged first conspiracy of Catiline, see Gruen (1969), Phillips (1976), Seager
(1964), and Waters (1970).
60 1.8. It was at M. Laeca's house that .. convenisse codem compluris eiusdem amentiae scelerisque socios.










Cicero's audience would have then remembered Jupiter as a "god of battle" who had been their

"divine protector" and "heavenly ally" in Rome's "first great military crisis."ls

Cicero' s introduction in 1.1-2 was designed to center attention right away on the tense

atmosphere surrounding the temple--a sacred locale in which Catiline's presence was

immediately j arring. 189 CiceoO assures the senate by pointing out the munitissimus locus in

which they were gathered, though his observation served the additional purpose of alerting them

to the potential danger of their situation. There were other places that would have been more

secure for the senate's meeting, but Cicero was concerned "not with the reality of security but

with the perception of security." 190 Therefore, the history and associations of the temple, as well

as the armed equites Cicero had stationed around it, made it the best location to serve this

symbolic purpose.

Cicero' s first outcry to the gods, O di immortales!, caps his synopsis of Catiline' s secret,

traitorous activities and his stunned observation (Video) that many of Catiline' s cohorts were

present in the midst of their "most sacred" (sanctissimo) senate proceedings (1.9). That these

men' s presence within the inviolate temple of Rome' s protecting god was grossly incongruous is

affirmed when Cicero mentions Jupiter directly, the "protector" (custodi) of their city, who had

many times in the past ensured their escape from such debilitating "cancer" (tamtttttttt~~~~~~~~~ horribilem

tamtttttttt~~~~~~~~~que infestamtttttttt~~~~~~~~ .. pestem, 1.11). Though Cicero would later characterize Catiline's

conspiracy with this same term, pestem,191 his oblique reference here speaks enough to the




'ss Ibid.

189 Ibid. 50.

190 Ibid. 59. Italics sic.

191 As discussed in chapter 2 of this study. See 1.30-1.










exposed. Undoubtedly, much of their recall would stir up unpleasant emotion. Cicero's "slave

imagery" was made effective by the fact that the typical Roman harbored deep prejudice,

mistr-ust, and even fear toward slaves. Although loyal slaves did exist,65 many Romans viewed

slaves as outsiders[] brought in" who were "ignorant of pieta~s. lacking in fides. and

imbued with treachery, imperiling their master' s very life."66

It is no wonder then that Cicero highlights Catiline's slave connections in his Second

Catilinarian, which he delivered to the people the following day. He includes the gladiator in a

listing of Catiline' s contacts, whose depravity and criminality illustrate that no lowlife was too

corrupt to be his companion (2.7). Even toward the end of the speech, he reminds the crowd that

every gladiator considers himself an intimate friend of Catiline (2.9) and would soon stand with

his army to fight for his cause (2.24). Cicero' s depiction of the lowest members of society taking

up arms, as Yavetz convincingly argues, enabled him to convince his listeners that Catiline's

intent was anarchy.67 In any case, this collaboration of runaway slaves represented the

fulfillment of their worst nightmares and served, consequently, as a highly effective scare tactic.

Yet Cicero, while not relying exclusively on stereotyping, seems most definitely to profit

from it at the expense (literally) of his enemies. He outlines a much clearer picture in 2.18-23 of

six distinct groups, who for various reasons have allied themselves with Catiline. They include

(1) the debt-ridden wealthy who are unwilling to part with their rich estates; (2) politically-

frustrated debtors who hunger for power; (3) indebted Sullan veterans who partied themselves


65 Valerius Maximus, Appian, and Cassius Dio, among others, attested to the existence of loyal slaves. Many such
stories existed as exempla, "ready-made devices for showing the effects of the breakdown of society, while
simultaneously offering an affirmation of its fundamental values." For more on loyal slaves and the role of
exemplum literature in Roman society, see Parker (2001). Quotation occurs on p.153. For an overview of slave
accounts, see Yavetz 1988: 158-60.

66 Parker (2001) 154-5. For the topos of the deceptive slave in Greek and Latin comedy, see Harsh (1955).

67 Yavetz (1963) 493.










experience vicariously the events he described. By appealing to the senses, Cicero would rely on

authority that could scarcely be argued-observational proof. In so doing, he would construct a

"reality" in the minds of his listeners, an effect he has in common with the media of today:

.. like a divining rod that is oriented to water, the media are by nature oriented to what is
novel and dramatic. In their emphasis and selective reporting of newsworthy happenings,
they help to fashion a picture of reality and' define for others what is important or
unimportant. 41

In the following chapters, this study will consider how Cicero's "emphasis" on observables and

his "selective reporting" of vivid details in the Catilinarians helped him convince all of Rome

that his political "picture of reality" matched the historical reality of 63 BC. To this end, he

would aim first at persuading the senate that their "important" responsibility was to cast the

visibly depraved Catiline out of Rome.






























41 Rosnow and Fine (1976) 105. Italics mine.










of public gossip. Cicero' s contemporary, the Auctor adHerennium (whom some have believed

to be Cicero himself), outlines several techniques that an orator might employ for alternately

bolstering and debunking rumors to his benefit."

Because of its potential for malleability, rumor could hardly be tr-usted, especially when

broadcast from the lips of a practiced speaker. One characteristic of rumor that lessened its

believability was its tendency to evolve over time. Since political knowledge in Cicero's day

spread largely by word of mouth, a report was often susceptible to revision and permutation.

Indeed, as information was communicated among friends, it was "interpreted and speculated

about," thus altering what would be passed on to the next hearer.8 In addition to what would be

lost due to failure of memory, it is estimated that only 40% of the original information would be

reliably passed on after 4 interchanges.89 Yet another interesting phenomenon concerns how

speculation became part of the oral tradition. As news passed from one person to the next, any

missing details would be reconstructed according to the teller' s inclination. As a result, the

details of a report tended to become "more interesting" as the information became less reliable.90

Cicero cites a number of rumors and reports to his advantage in the Catilinarians. He

concentrates initially on Catiline' s schemes of the recent past, looking to the rumored "first

conspiracy" as a precedent that validates his fears about a new plot against the government.91 He

sprinkles other rumors throughout the speeches as well, reporting on Catiline's collusion with

slaves, while envisioning mass slaughter, raging fires, and looting throughout the city. Once

87Rhet. Her. 2.8

88Laurence (1994) 63.

89 Ibid.

90 Ibid.

91 See Chapter 1, n. 37 for a list of scholars who have conunented on the "confused business" known as the first
Catilinarian conspiracy. Quotation is from Everitt (2003) 90.










Logos should be displayed openly, appearing only to instruct, he says; pathos and ethos,

meanwhile, ought to flow throughout the entire speech just as blood courses through the body.

Schick puts the relationship another way, suggesting that, "logical appeal should be the basis, or

the warp, of the oration, while the ethical and pathetical are interwoven as the woof."142

Additionally, in their own ways both ethos and pathos stir the emotions.143 The types and

degrees of emotion elicited vary with either means of persuasion, and are thus dependent upon

the orator' s manner of speaking. In 2.211-2, Cicero characterizes the ethical tone as lenis

("gentle") and summissa ("moderate"), which, through its show of calmness and reflection,144

encourages the audience to feel respect and admiration for the speaker. The pathetical tone, on

the other hand, is intenta ("intense") and vehemens ("vehement"), provoking a more energetic,

and radical emotional response from the audience. Despite this difference, Cicero concedes that

these two kinds of speaking possess a certain similarity that makes distinguishing between them

at times very difficult:

Nam et ex illa lenitate, qua conciliamur eis, qui audiunt, ad hanc vim acerrimam, qua
cosdem excitamus, influat oportet liquid, et ex hac vi non numquam animi liquid
inflandum est illi lenitate; neque est ulla temperatior oratio quam illa .. (2.212)

The well-seasoned oration, he believes, embraces an ethos that integrates seamlessly with pathos:

it imparts a measure of gentleness to impassioned speech, lends animation to soft words, and

imbues the entire discourse with persuasive power. Ideally, the oration should be organic, with

each of these elements complementing and enhancing the other, as the need of the moment

requires.



142 Schick (1965) 18.

143 In De Orat. 2.211, Cicero distinguishes between the rational, argumentative function of logos and collective
emotional appeal of ethos and pathos.
144 Cf. De Orat. 2.182.










Phillips, E.J. 1976. "Catiline's Conspiracy." Historia 25: 441-48.

Potter, D. S. 1999. Literary Texts and the Roman Historian. London.

Price, J.J. 1998. "The Failure of Cicero's First Catilinarian.'" Studies in Latin Literature 10: 106-
28.

Ramsey, J.T. 1982. "Cicero, pro Sulla 68 and Catiline's Candidacy in 66 BC." HSPh 86: 121-
31.

Rawson, E. 1972. "Cicero the Historian and Cicero the Antiquarian." JRS~ 62: 33-45.

Robinson, A. 1994. "Avoiding the Responsibility: Cicero and the Suppression of Catiline's
Conspiracy." SyllClass 5: 43-51.

Rosnow, R.L. and G.A. Fine. 1976. Rumor and Gossip: The Social Psychology ofHearssay.s~~~~sss~~ New
York.

Schick, T. 1965. "Cicero and Pathetic Appeal in Oratory." The Classical Bulletin 42.2: 17-
18.

Scullard, H.H. 1965a. From the Gracchi to Nero. London.

-.1965b. "The Political Career of a Novus Homo." In Cicero, edited by T.A. Dorey, pp. 1-25.
New York.

Seager, R. 1964. "The First Catilinarian Conspiracy." Historia 13: 338-47.

-.1973. "Iusta Catilinae" Historia 22.2: 240-48.

Shakespeare, W. 1998. The Tragedy ofHamnlet Prince ofDenmark. Edited by S. Barnet. New
York.

Solmson, F. 1968. "Aristotle and Cicero on the Orator' s Playing upon the Feelings." In Kleine
Schriften 2: 216-30.

Steel, C.E.W. 2001. Cicero, Rhetoric, and Empire. Oxford.

-.2005. Reading Cicero: Genre and Performance in Late Republican Rome. London.

Stockton, D. 1971. Cicero: A Political Biography. Oxford.

Taylor, L.R. 1949. PartyP~~~~PPPPP~~~~PPPP Politics in the Age of Caesar. Berkeley.

Vasaly, A. 1 993. Representations: Images of the World in Ciceronian Oratory. Berkeley.

Waters, K.H. 1970. "Cicero, Sallust, and Catilina." Historia 19: 195-215.










(erumpunt) in full view." All efforts that Catiline might make to conceal his plans are futile

since they are now clearer than daylight (luce sunt clariora) to Cicero and the senators.

After recounting in detail the nefarious plots of Catiline in 1.7-10 and exhorting him to

leave the city in 1.10-13,52 CiceoO reexamines the visible signs of Catiline's depraved character.

He puts another rhetorical question to Catiline: quae libido ab oculis, quod facinus a manibus

umquam tuis, quod flagitium a toto corpore afuit (1.13)? Cicero prods the senators, whose eyes

had just observed the truth of Cicero' s earlier impressions, to witness the libidinous eyes (oculis)

of Catiline, whose hands (manibus) are given to crime, and whose entire body (toto corpore) is

complicit in scandal. Synecdoche reduces Catiline to the vileness of his parts, suggesting a

detachment both horrible and unnatural. The enargeia of his description is powerful, but Cicero

does not end with this picture alone. In his continued censure of Catiline, he reminds the

senators of their own actions when first confronted with Catiline' s appearance in the Senate--

how they shunned him at his entrance and quickly vacated the seats nearest to him (1.16).

Presumably, all maintained their distance during the speech, leaving Catiline visibly isolated and

thus an easy target for the orator's exploitation (see Fig. 1).

Cicero next considers what he would do if he were in Catiline' s position:

et si me meis civibus iniuria suspectum tam graviter atque offensum viderem,
carere me aspect civium quam infestis omnium oculis conspici mallem ..
dubitas quormm mentis sensusque volneras, corum aspectum praesentiamque
vitare? .. ab cormm oculis aliquo concederes (1.17).

Reasoning aloud, he presents the options to Catiline. Since he has been publicly branded as

mistr-usted suspectumm, literally "under watch") and offensive, just as he himself can witness (me

51 Maclardy ('I ll 14 55 notes how inlustrantur and erumpunt oppose, respectively, obscuarare and continere.

52 Cicero's recommendation that Catiline leave the city seems counterproductive and even contradictory to the
orator's argument concerning the immediate danger that Catiline poses. Catiline threatens the Republic with danger,
so the senate should let him leave? See Craig (1993) 261. On the other hand, there are good tactical reasons for
Cicero to request Catiline's departure--by so doing, Catiline proves Cicero's allegations!









as evidence for Catiline' s conspiracy. He understood fear' s motivating force--in the case of the

senators, most feared for the security of their possessions more than the well being of the

republiC.109 It seems too that in "reducing revolution to incendiarism," Cicero was appealing

directly to the practical fears of the people.110 Correspondingly, he commences his address to the

people in 2. 1 with the declaration, non in campo, non in foro, non in curia non denique intra

domesticos parietes pertimescemus ("neither in the Campus Martius, nor Forum, nor Senate, nor

indeed even within the walls of our own homes, shall we tremble")--a sentiment which, for its

suggestiveness, serves to alert fear rather than allay it. Throughout the course of this speech,

Cicero, in the guise of protector and comforter to the people, inspires their fear by informing it.

Although images of ruination abound in both the first and second speeches, Cicero has

yet to provide substantial proof of these dangers. For a "dozen murderous attempts, and several

cases of attempted arson," Waters points out, "we do not hear of one house burned down, not one

consular killed or even wounded."ll History does not in fact confirm whether any of Catiline' s

deadly schemes ever came to fruition-only that they were obstructed and publicized, by Cicero.

As Waters indicates, we simply lack evidence beyond Cicero's eager postulations that these

events might occur. In the next section, we will see how Cicero procured enough seeming proof

to convince his audience that Catiline's rumored conspiracy was an ominous reality.

Evidence in Hand

If Cicero was to prevent his attack on Catiline from being interpreted as only conspiracy

theory, he needed to present compelling hard evidence. Prior to his delivery of the Third

Catilinarian, the only ostensible evidence that Cicero could point to in support of his conspiracy

109 Cape (1995) 263.

110 Konstan (1993) 25.

"' Waters (1970) 196.










It is precisely this need for credibility that led Cicero to point out all the observable

manifestations of his claims in the Catilinarians. In this chapter we consider how the orator uses

visual imagery borrowed from Catiline's appearance, actions, and associates to support his

conclusions about Catiline' s evil character. In so doing, he lessens his own burden of proof since

the evidence is apparent to all who follow his line of sight.

A Portrait of Catiline

Cicero begins his First Ca~tilina.ria.n appalled to see Catiline present in the senate.46

Being thus offended, he launches into the invective that would characterize his first oration. He

opens with a rhetorical question directed at Catiline: "How long, Catiline, will you continually

abuse our patience?"47 Such an opening immediately sets Catiline in opposition to the speaker

and his listeners, alluded to in the possessive pronoun nostra. Cicero summarily recounts

specific examples of the heightened security and increased tensions in the city, seeking to know

if any of these references provoke Catiline' s emotion. The answer to the orator' s question

Nihilne te. .. moverunt? is implied in his six repetitions of nihil. His catalog of visible evidence

recalls what all have witnessed and by association these images indict Catiline, who is clearly

affected "not at all."

Cicero wastes no time with formalities. To the point, he declares his disbelief that a man

so dangerous as Catiline is yet allowed to live--a man whose oculi observe and single out each

one of them for slaughter.48 CiceoO's close scrutiny of Catiline transports the audience from a


and all the varied charges of criminality and immorality, particularly those in sources such as the In Toga Candida
and the Commentariolum Petitionis, which predate the conspiracy, can hardly be dismissed as total fabrications."

46 According to Sallust (Cat. 31), this speech was an impromptu reaction to Catiline's audacity, rather than a
thorough expose of the conspiracy. Cf. Cic. Catil. 1.1,2.

47 Catil. 1.1. This and subsequent translations are mine, unless otherwise indicated.

48 1.2: ... notat et designat oculis ad caedem unum quemque nostrum .









Most scholars agree that Catiline's conspiracy was not some "trifling episode"; as we

discussed, Cicero's contemporaries acknowledged the seriousness of these events and none

disputed his claim of preserving the state from harm.237 Twenty years after the crisis of the

conspiracy, Cicero reflected thus:


For never was the republic in more serious peril, never was peace more profound. Thus,
as a result of my counsels and my vigilance, their weapons slipped suddenly from the
hands of the most desperate traitors--dropped to the ground of their own accord! What
achievement in war, then, was ever so great? What triumph can be compared with
that?238

After so many years, Cicero' s memory of the conspiracy and the glory of his personal role in

suppressing it remained fresh in his mind. From the moment his account, in four illustrative

speeches, was recorded in writing, the Catilinarian conspiracy assumed a place within the annals

of history. While it is possible that Cicero' s evocations may not have presented an accurate

portrayal of the events as they unfolded, his speeches reveal to us, in their vivid construction of

Cicero' s political "reality," the persuasive power of his oratory.




















2 Mitchell (1979) 239-40. Cf. Wood (1988) 50-1.

2 Off 1.77. Translation from Wood (1988) 51.










armed and allied with men of the meanest ilk. Then (2), he illustrates the grave danger that

threatens the Roman people and the city Rome, appealing to their fears to stimulate their

allegiance to the republic. Next (3), he rallies the Senate and the masses to his cause, positioning

himself as their omniscient leader and savior, whom all can look to for guidance. Lastly (4), he

aligns himself with the gods and their divine oversight, thus securing divine sanction for his

suppression of the conspiracy and uniting all Romans in their retributive action against the

conspirators. Thus, Cicero's colorful description (or enargeia) is actually his artistic and careful

construction of political "reality." In effect, this verbal animation of events and characters

contributes substantially to the persuasive power of his oratory in the Catilinarians.

Interpretation

The historical accuracy of events surrounding the Catilinarian orations has been much

debated.ls However, this study does not propose to evaluate historical evidence in Cicero's

speeches. Nor is this an attempt to discuss or analyze his representation of events by judging his

personal motives, since a persuasive text, by its very nature, tends more to illuminate the

subjective character of its author than to reveal objective fact. The aim, rather, is to delve into

the literary world that Cicero creates within his four speeches against Catiline--a world and

reality unto itself for the purpose of persuading his audience--in order to appreciate a history

richly illustrated just as the orator wanted it recorded and remembered.


1s Yavetz (1963) 485-87 has outlined four categories into which historical-critical discussions of the conspiracy may
be organized. For simplicity, I have placed the discussions into two categories, which follow. The traditional
account (as given by Cicero in the Catilinarians and Sallust in the Bellum Catillinae) has been largely upheld by
E.G. Hardy, The Catilinarian Conspiracy in Its Context: A Restudy of the Evidence (Oxford 1924); E.D. Eagle,
"Catiline and the Concordia Ordinum" in Phoenix 3.1 (1949); H.H. Scullard, From the Gracchi to Nero (London
1965); D.R. Shakleton Bailey, Cicero (New York 1971); E.J. Phillips, "Catiline's Conspiracy" in Historia 25.4
(1976); and T.N. Mitchell, Cicero: The Ascending Years (New Haven 1979). Challenges to the traditional account
have issued from D.R. Dudley, The Civilization ofRome (New York 1960) see p. 92; K.H. Waters, "Cicero, Sallust,
and Catilina" in Historia 19 (1970); and R. Seager, "Iusta Catilinae" in Historia 22.2 (1973). For a moderate, more
recent interpretation of the conspiracy, see A. Everitt, Cicero: The Life and Times ofRome 's Greatest Politician
(New York 2003) 87-112.










LIST OF FIGURES


Fiare


page


1 Painting by Cesare Maccari (1840-1919), Cicero Denounces Catiline ................... ..........35










senses), to animate his point. William Butler Yeats employs the related device synecdoche,

substituting a part for the whole or the whole for a part, in one of his last poems. Contemplating

death, he writes, "Cast a cold eye / On life, on death. / Horseman pass by!"4 This "cold eye"

with which he admonishes his readers to glance upon the start and finish of life seems to

encourage a stoic regard for the sum of human existence. His declaration, "Horseman pass by!"

suggests that this glance be brief and uninvolved. Synecdoche allows Yeats to substitute a part

(the eye) for the whole (introspective observation of life), which well conveys the starkness in

his admonition.

These devices of metonomy and synecdoche fall under the broader category of metaphor,

a figure of speech in which a "name or descriptive word or phrase is transferred to an obj ect or

action different from, but analogous to, that to which it is literally applicable."' Examples of

sensory metaphor in literature include Shakespeare's "mind's eye," the means by which Hamlet,

in mourning, vividly recalls the life of his father; 6 and Wordsworth' s "inward eye," his "bliss of

solitude," through which he reminisces about his childhood.' Modern readers might equate this

eye with the memory or imagination; nevertheless, metaphor allowed these writers to describe by

analogy something for which they had no scientific understanding. They conveyed a seemingly

invisible concept (the imagination) by comparing it to an image (the eye) that was visible and

family ar.







4 "Under Ben Bulben" 6.9-11.

S"metaphof' in OED Online.

6 Hamlet 1.2.185.

S"I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud," 3.3,4.









slaves and ruin shared a common thread within "the same cloth." Cicero therefore inserts

numerous references to these and other dangers when stressing to his audience the far-reaching

devastation of Catiline' s conspiracy.

Slaughter, Arson, and Looting

Cicero's earliest warnings concern the slaughter of citizens (caede in 1.2, 3, 6, 7, 16, 24,

2.6, 7, 10; necem in 1.24) and figuratively, the murder of the fatherland (parricidium in 1.17, 33).

These violent crimes loom in the minds of the audience; but they quickly assume the more

menacing silhouette of a knife as Cicero individualizes the mass slaughter--some will die by tela

(1.2, 15) or ferrum (1.13, 2. 1, 2); others by sica (1.16, 2. 1), gladius (1.32), or mucro (2.2); and

yet others will fall by arma (2.13, 14, 15). In naming specific weapons, the orator uses

metonymy to animate their shared function in the conspiracy: to kill. In similar fashion, he

employs synecdoche to describe the particular talents of those who will bear the weapons. There

are those who specialize in parricide and treason (parricida~s, 2.22); those skilled in assassination

and murder (sicarios, 2.22); those who will take up the arms of soldiers (armati, 1.24); and, of

course, those trained in the gladiatorial schools (gladiatores, 2.7, 9, 24, 26).

Cicero warns too of fires that will ravage the city. In almost every instance, he invokes

this image in conjunction with slaughter, as in caed atque incendium, which occurs four times

(1.3, 6, 2.6, 10--though the terms caedis and incendium are mentioned twice in 2. 10). The only

reference to incendium in the city without any direct mention of slaughter is in 1.9, when Cicero

discloses the plans made by Catiline and the other conspirators at the house of Marcus Laeca. At

that meeting, Cicero reveals, Catiline distributed tasks, allocated the regions of Italy, and

assigned parts of the city for burning. The incendium in this passage, mentioned singly, implies










character must mirror Catiline's own.


Conspiracy as Pestis

Toward the end of the First Catilinarian, Cicero concludes his invective with a frightening

metaphor: the conspiracy is a pestis, a cancer, and the root and seed of all evil.73 In this

illustration, Catiline's conspiracy becomes a disease--a plague, even- that threatens to

decimate the populace of Rome. He is an unseen evil, attacking from within and devastating if

undetected and uneradicated. There can be no doubt about the terror of such an image to a

society with little medical defense against epidemic infection.74 Furthermore, Cicero has

stripped Catiline of his final vestige of human appearance; he is no longer a man, but a

monstrous cancer and the breeding ground of all other pestilence--and as pestis, he will aim for

the vital organs of the republic.

Cicero urges the senate that the disease must be eradicated. Unless the senators scour the

republic of every trace of pestis, the cancer will spread, eventually settling deep "within the veins

and vitals" (in venis atque in visceribus, 1.31) of the republic. Clearly, Catiline threatens more

than just the oculi et aures of the Roman people; he endangers the heart and life blood of the

Roman government and threatens the safety of every citizen. Cicero expands the metaphor: just

as a drink of cold water offers temporary relief to the man afflicted with illness, until he is

wracked with more intense suffering, so the republic will gain quick security from the

banishment of Catiline; but if his followers and co-conspirators are not exiled with him, the

pestis will enlarge (1.31).


73 1.30: stirps ac semen malorum omnium. Cf. 1.11.

74 Webb (1997) 124 notes that the ancient "imagination" was based on "pre-existing reality" and was therefore
bounded by the values and truths accepted by society. An orator could rely on the stability and endurance of this
imagination to produce the desired effect on his audience. This idea is comparable to the "common place"
(Kotvoo 20oxoo). Thus, the orator would tailor his appeals to benefit from the shared cultural experiences of his
audience.









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I thank my supervising committee chair, Dr. Lewis Sussman, for his patient mentoring and

expertise, Dr. Timothy Johnson for his guidance and support, and Dr. Hans-Friedrich Mueller for

planting the seed that became this study. I am grateful to the Department of Classics at the

University of Florida for being my academic home for the last seven years and to those graduate

students who helped me survive my first year--Jarrod, Becky, Jennifer, Will, Andy, Jon, and

Randy. I am thankful to my church family for their encouragement through gifts of food during

the final weeks of writing, which gave me the strength to complete this project. I especially

thank my parents, Tim and Renee Miller, for both inspiring and grounding me with their love--

and for reminding me of what matters most in life. And finally, I thank my husband David, who

brought me back to Gainesville to finish what I started and has since endured with me through

countless hours of study. I am grateful for his sacrifices, his partnership, and his love.









CHAPTER 6
CONSTRUCTION OF A POLITICAL "REALITY"

Cicero's Catilinarian orations showcase, to great effect, a descriptive technique that has

traditionally been relegated to the poet: imagery. While Cicero did write his share of poetry, he

displayed his linguistic finesse most remarkably in the genre of oratory, where he excelled in the

art of persuasion. With devices and methods that lent themselves to the visual, such as metaphor

and enargeia, Cicero was able to construct in the mind' s eye of his audience a picture of reality

that favored his political advancement, and detracted, correspondingly, from the image of his

enemies.

Cicero employs imagery in all four of his speeches, vividly animating his depiction of

characters and events. He exhibits to his audience, first of all, the depraved character of Catiline

who, with his friends, engages in activities so immoral and vile that the orator likens his

influence to a pestis, or cancerous disease. Cicero then focuses on the symptoms and casualties

of this disease, displaying an apocalyptic vision of the republic that j ars shockingly with the

grandeur that the people could see around them in the Forum. In order to prevent the ruin of fire

and slaughter from destroying the city, Cicero proj ects an image of himself that recommends his

authority as a consul, visionary, and imperator togatus, suggesting that he alone is capable of

saving the republic from harm. And indeed, when he does succeed in capturing the conspirators,

he seems prideful at first as he announces his official recognition as Rome's "savior." However,

he is quick to attribute the ultimate preservation of the city to the immortal gods, and in

particular, to Jupiter, who presided over the Forum on the day that the conspiracy was revealed

and adopted the consul as his proxy. In these ways, Cicero employs visual imagery, evokes

scenes from his audience' s memory and imagination, and exploits the images of his surroundings

to construct an image of reality that was most useful to his purpose.









"it is not creativity that wins an audience...but rather telling people what they want to hear in a

context that makes the message credible."236















































236 Edelman (1988) 113.










more convincing than the fact that, as Jupiter's gaze fell on the senate and the people, all did

indeed see (vidistis) the secret schemes of the conspiracy "illuminated and revealed" (inlustrata

et patefacta), just as the soothsayers had predicted? Most scholars now suspect that Cicero had,

in actuality, specially timed the statue's replacement for his use as a "prop in an elaborate

stunt."212 Admittedly, there does seem to have been an element of theatricality in the day's

events, as Butler argues:

.. Cicero acted out his command performance, with all Rome as his stage. First the
morning crowd in the Forum was startled to see the consul Cicero leading the praetor
Lentulus down from the Palatine to the temple of Concord, holding him by the wrist in a
well-recognized Roman gesture of violence. (Here the pantomime enacted Cicero's
superior imperium as consul.) They were followed by several other men under armed
guard. At that very moment, a statue of Jupiter was being hoisted into place on the
Capitoline, his face turned toward the Forum below. .. [and] hundreds of hurriedly
summoned senators were filing into the temple.213


Whether or not Cicero "carefully orchestrated the whole affair,"214 it is clearly

indisputable that he exhibited "superb stage management" by recognizing and exploiting the

rhetorical opportunities of his locale.215 Through his numerous allusions to the "immortal gods,"

the greatest and most powerful of whom was looking down upon their assembly, Cicero was able

to convince the people of the gods' abiding presence in the city and concern for the plight of its

citizens. In this drama of Rome's conspiratorial crisis, Cicero points to Jupiter (ille, ille,

luppiter, 3.22) as the city's protector, who would not see the "temples and shrines of the gods"

(deorum templuis atque delubris) desecrated by the enemy. For this reason, the gods guided

212 Butler (2002) 97. While originally, in the context of this speech, Cicero attributes the statue's reestablishment to
divine involvement, he would later (in the De Divinatione) ascribe it to "mere coincidence," though Butler believes
that he "makes even this suggestion with a bemused smugness that implies he knows better." Cf. Vasaly (1993) 81;
Aldrette (1999) 25-6; Heibges (1969) 844.

213 Butler (2002) 86.
214 Ibid.

215 Fantham (1997) 114. Cf. Aldrette (1999) 26.









Similar language emphasizing this "dramatic show of unity" continues throughout much

of the rest of the speech.233 All the people were j oined together (coniungit, 4. 15) in a

"harmonious alliance" (societatem concordia[m]) and "bond" (coniunctionem). All classes were

of the same mind (consentiunt, 4. 18) in the best interest of their "common homeland" (patria

communis). "All" men (omnis .. omnis .. universum, 4. 19) were truly united in a common

mindset (unum atque idem sentientem), and no force would ever be strong enough "to break or

weaken" (confcringere et labefactare, 4.22) this bond (coniunctionem) between the senate, the

Equites, and all loyal citizens (bonorum omnium). In closing (4.24), Cicero impresses upon their

minds the images of all they cherish and have in common--their family ties (coniungibus as

liberis), the sacred places (aris; focis; fanis; templis), the public and private places (urbis tectis

ac sedibus), and their values (imperio; libertate; salute and universe re public: "the entire

republic"). As the senate decides how to punish the men who put all their interests at risk, Cicero

reaffirms his loyalty to them and vows always to defend their cooperative decision on the

country's behalf.

Cicero' s selection of the Temple of Concord for the setting of this speech was intended to

reinforce his imagery of the "unity of the classes," or concordia ordinum, in support of the

conspirators' execution.234 This was no "casual choice,"235 since it enabled Cicero to paint an

idealized picture of the masses rallying around the senate in a place where this was easily

conceivable. Indeed, the people were out in hordes that day and some were highly interested in

the senate proceedings, but Cicero did not need to embellish this scene. In the end, he knew that



233 Mitchell (1979) 238.

234 Eagle (1949) 15; Butler (2002) 99.
235Ibid.









CHAPTER 3
A RAVAGED RES P UBLICA

Res Publica at Risk

On November 8th, 63 BC, Cicero delivered his First Catilinarian before the Senate,

precipitating Catiline's departure from Rome. In his Second Catilinarian, delivered to the

people on the following day, Cicero triumphantly announces the news of Catiline' s hasty

departure and calls for the subsequent cleansing of the city from the "bilge water" (sentinamn,

2.7) of his accomplices. Through Cicero's protracted vilification of Catiline and his companions,

the orator had effectively convinced his listeners of Catiline' s depravity. Now that the enemy

leader has taken leave of the city, he stands convicted by his action of complicity in the

conspiracy. But the danger has not yet been averted, only delayed; Catiline left in his wake

many criminal partners, who remained in the city, awaiting his directives. Accordingly, Cicero

proceeds to the second phase of his argumentation: namely, to convince Rome and all her

citizens that a dire crisis is at hand--by the hand of Catiline and his agents.

To this end, Cicero devotes himself to illustrating the mass destruction of which the enemy

is yet capable. By displaying a war-torn, waste-laid, fire-ravaged Rome to the imagination of his

listeners--a predictive technique that the Auctor adHerennium calls descriptio--he arouses

within them strong feelings of anger (indignatio) and pity (misericordia).n7 This stirring up of

the emotions, or pathos, relies heavily on sensory imagery and proves, as Cicero discusses at

length in his De Oratore,78 to be a powerful means of persuasion. Thus he aims to convince all

that Catiline' s conspiracy, though its leader is now outside the city walls, still subj ects Rome to

grave risk.

77Rhet. Her. 4.51. See also Webb (1997) 120.

78De Orat. 2.114-15: 121: 128-29; 176; 179-81; 185-211. Despite such a protracted discussion, Cicero actually
manages to avoid the term pathos. See May and Wisse (2001) 34-35.









Cicero shifted his attention next to Statilius (3.10). Again, Cicero presented a letter,

soliciting his identification of its seal (signinz) and handwriting (nzanunt sua~n). Statilius, he

reports, readily acknowledged the marks as his own and, after the letter was read aloud,

conceded to authoring it (confessus est). Likewise Lentulus, when shown his letter, admitted its

seal (signunt) to be his own; however, once the letter was read aloud (3.11), he struggled against

the implication of his guilt. Only when all the evidence had been produced and read out (toto

ia~n indicio exposito atque edito), and Lentulus recognized that Volturcius and the Allobroges

had unequivocally betrayed him, did the "force of conscience" (conscientiae vis) finally compel

him to confess.

Just then, Volturcius demanded that the letter Lentulus gave him for Catiline be brought

forth and opened before them all (3.12). In obvious distress (vehententissinte perturbatus),

Lentulus again acknowledged his seal and handwriting (signunt et nzanunt sua~n) when shown

the letter, even though he had composed it anonymously (sine nontine). The contents therein

were brief but incriminating, furnishing Cicero with his most damning evidence on record, the

conspiratorial word, which he quotes verbatim to the crowd. In that letter, as Butler concludes,

"the conspiracy's final, irrevocable undoing arguably comes from a single guarded phrase ..

etia~n injinzorunt, the suggestion that Catiline should make use 'even of the lowliest members of

society,' presumably slaves."116 JUSt as before, Cicero makes the most of the "horror stories"

surrounding the conspirator' s plans;"' in so doing, he provokes fear and leaves the people with a

lasting impression of the disasters which they had fortuitously escaped.


116 Butler (2002) 90.

"7 Everitt (2003) 107.









CHAPTER 4
THE CONSUL SEES ALL

Midway through the Third Catilinarian, Cicero evokes the memory of Gaius Marius, a

"very illustrious man" (clarissimo viro, 3.15), whose military accomplishments had garnered

popular admiration and the title, "protector of this city" (custodem huius urbis, 3.24). Indeed,

few Romans could boast the status of a national hero, particularly one celebrated as a "founder"

or "preserver" of the state.131 CiceoO's allusions to Marius, though brief, seem to emphasize the

orator' s affinity to this icon. This is especially apparent when one considers how extensively he

covers his own personal role in exposing the conspiracy: he credits himself with driving Catiline

from the city (3.16, 17), preventing widespread destruction (3.15, 17), apprehending the

conspirators (3.5, 6), and eliciting their confessions of guilt (3.10-12). Inevitably, he believed it

was his due when the senate decreed a thanksgiving to the gods in his honor.

In reporting this news to the people (3.15), Cicero proudly announces his distinction as the

first civilian (mihi primum ... togato) since the founding of the city to receive this official honor.

In a similar vein, he notes how his thanksgiving would be unique from all others in this regard--

that it would commemorate the salvation (conservata) of the city. Perhaps to lend an air of

ceremony to his proclamation, he quotes from the senatorial decree, which designates (and

reiterates) the reason for their continued safety: quod urbem incendiis, caede civis, Italiam bello

liberassem ("because I had delivered the city from fires, the citizens from slaughter, and Italy

from war"). While the first-person verb liberassem seems suspect in a direct quotation of the

senate's decree, Cicero nevertheless proclaims himself a liberator, effectively aligning himself

with, in fact, even surpassing, Marius the "protector."




131 Bell (1997) 19.










Beginning in 2.24, Cicero' s discourse turns urgent as he depicts the battlefield of Rome' s

imminent civil war. He uses a "vocabulary of war" to illustrate the combatants (cohortent;

praetorian; praesidia; exercitus; and insperatores: 2.24) and their conflict contenderr; pugnat;

certantine;t~~~~~ttttt~~~~ proelio: 2.25; defendite, 2.26).162 Though he had proffered his leadership early in the

speech (2. 11), Cicero takes time to construct this war imagery before assuming the role of togato

duce et insperatore ("general-commander in toga," 2.28). The word togatus, appearing here for

the first time and juxtaposed with the military title dux, is significant because the toga is a

civilian garment, connoting peace. 163 This is an image of striking contrast, which May interprets

as follows:

By creating the role of a dux or insperator togatus for himself, a "civilian general" if you
will, Cicero can share in the glory of a kind of military command and victory, but still
maintain the persona of the man of peace who, in favorable contrast to those men of war
who resort to violence in order to solve the political problems of Rome, is able to save the
state without recourse to armsl64

Although the conspiracy would eventually have to be checked by military power, Cicero presents

himself as the "essential civilian counterpart" to the Republic's military leaders--a favorable

contrast to men like Marius, Sulla, and Pompey.165

Cicero had alluded to Pompey earlier (unius virtute, 2. 11), crediting him with the

establishment of peace in Rome's territories abroad. He reminded the people quickly, however,

that such peace did not exist at home. Unlike Pompey's battles that were fought against

foreigners and kings, these looming domestic battles would be fought against less tangible

adversaries: luxury, madness, and crime. Cicero promises them in 2.28 that, as their insperator


162 Steel (2001) 168.

163 MacDonald (1977) 96-7 n. b.

164 May (1988) 57.

165 Steel (2001) 168.










LIST OF REFERENCES

Aldrette, G. S. 1999. Gestures and Acclamations in Ancient Rome. Baltimore.

Allen, Jr., W. 1954. "Cicero's Conceit." TAPhA 85:121-44.

Altheim, F. 1938. A History ofRoman Religion. London.

Bailey, D.R.S. 1971. Cicero. New York.

Barber, K.A. 2004. Rhetoric in Cicero 's Pro Balbo. New York.

Barlow, J. 1994. "Cicero's Sacrilege in 63 B.C." Studies in Latin Literature 7: 180-89.

Bartlett, J. 1992. BartlettBBB~~~BBB~~~BBB~~ 's FamFFFFFFFF~~~~~~~~~ilia Quotations, 16th ed. Edited by J. Kaplan. Boston.

Barton, C.A. 1999. "The Roman Blush: The Delicate Matter of Self-Control." In Constructions
of the Classical Body," edited by J.I. Porter, pp. 212-34. Ann Arbor.

Bell, A.J.E. 1997. "Cicero and the Spectacle of Power." JRS 87: 1-22.

Bible. 1971. King James Version. Nashville.

Bradley, K.R. 1978. "Slaves and the Conspiracy of Catiline." CPh 73.4: 329-36.

Butler, S. 2002. The Hand of Cicero. London.

Cape Jr., R.W. 1995. "The Rhetoric of Politics in Cicero's Fourth Catilinarian." AJPh 116.2:
255-77.

Clark, A.C., ed. 1989. M~ Tulli Ciceronis Orationes: Pro Sex. Roscio, De Imperio Cn. Pompei,
Pro Cluentio, In Catilinam, Pro M~urena, Pro Caelio. Oxford.

Clarke, M.L. 1996. Rhetoric at Rome: A Historical Survey. London.

Craig, C.P. 1993. "Three Simple Questions for Teaching Cicero's First Catilinarian." CJ 88.3:
255-67.

Crawford, J.W. 1994. M. Tullius Cicero The Fragmentary Speeches: An Edition 0I ithr
Commentary, 2nd ed. Atlanta.

Corbett, E.P.J. 1965. Classical Rhetoric for the M~odern Student. New York.

Dudley, D.R. 1960. The Civilization ofRome. New York.

Eagle, E.D. 1949. "Catiline and the Concordia Ordinum." Phoenix 3.1: 15-30.

Edelman, M. 1988. Constructing the Political Spectacle. Chicago.



































amnabilissimae meae magistrae, Mrs. Linda Renick










vision. Cicero will dedicate much of the remainder of this speech (along with frequent reminders

in his succeeding speeches) to proving the transcendent power of his consular vision.

"Review with me" (Recognosce nzecunt, 1.8), the orator next entreats his audience, asking,

in essence, that they reevaluate what he knows about the conspiracy. m5 Cicero expresses

confidence that his listeners, in so doing, will appreciate his vigilance (intelleges .. me vigilare)

for the safety of the republic--which, he says, is much keener than Catiline' s vigilance for its

destr-uction. This clear contrast between the orator and his enemy is an established device of

ethos, allowing Cicero to emphasize the polarity between them. m5 However, as it speaks to

Cicero's watchful devotion, it also admits Catiline's devotion to watching--and waiting--for his

next opportunity to strike. Inevitably, this realization should bring the audience even closer to

trusting Cicero who positions himself to be the best match for such a formidable opponent.

Through the repeated assurance of his exceptional perception, Cicero secures the

audience's faith. He spends considerable time detailing his knowledge of the conspirators' secret

activities (1.8-10), Catiline's murderous past (1.14-15), and what he predicts will be Catiline's

response to his censure (1.24-26)--a forecast he can easily make because he knows (scia~n .

scia~n .. scia~n, 1.24) what preparations Catiline has already set in place. He sees (video, 1.8;

Ego video consul, 1.9), moreover, men within the audience who were just two nights ago plotting

with Catiline. This is an especially potent evocation, inviting the listeners to imagine who

among them appears blackened in Cicero's eyes. Clearly, none were in doubt of Catiline's dark

character, as Cicero illustrates when revisiting Catiline's shunned entrance to the senate

assembly (1.16).


157 Here, as elsewhere, Cicero uses the second-person singular to address Catiline. Given the context of the speech,
however, it is evident that the orator is appealing to his senatorial audience as well.

15s See the discussion above concerning ethos. Refer also to Cic, De Orat. 2.182-4.









Having thus itemized his store of evidence against the conspirators, it seems almost

superfluous for Cicero to mention Gabinius and his confession (3.12). However, with the weight

of evidence resting firmly in Cicero's favor, it still benefits him to relate his success in extracting

every confession, as this further bolsters his credibility; for none could argue against his claims

in the face of such blatant proofs, and all would agree that his judgment had been correct from

the beginning. So, Cicero took great care to display the evidence: he did not open the letters, but

rather gave them to the senate with unbroken seals (3.7); he commissioned four senators to make

a transcript of the senate proceedings, which he distributed over all Italy; and he delivered all

the details to the people in his Third Catilinarian, demonstrating his conviction (in 3.3) that the

conspiracy should be exposed "to the fullest possible extent."119

Gabinius' confession, then, is a fitting conclusion to Cicero's version of events that had

unfolded at the senate house; figuratively, it is the last page of his record book. In 3.13, he

overviews the evidence, and appends the following epilogue:

Ac mihi quidem, Quirites, cum illa certissima visa sunt argument atque indicia sceleris,
tabellae, signa, manus, denique unius cuiusque confessio tum multo certiora illa, color,
oculi, voltus, taciturnitas. Sic enim obstupuerant, sic terram intuebantur, sic furtim non
numquam inter sese aspiciebant ut non iam ab aliis indicari sed indicare se ipsi viderentur.

Cicero had exhibited sufficient and convincing proofs--the testimonies of witnesses, the letters

(tabellae), seals (signa), handwriting (manus), and confessions of the conspirators (unius

cuiusque confessio); but these were not the only testaments to the men's guilt. As the

interrogation progressed, it was the demeanor of the accused--their pallor (color), eyes oculii),

expressions (voltus), and growing silence (taciturnita~s)--that virtually underlined their


its Cic. Sul. 41-3.

119 Mitchell (1979) 237.









of the "security" (salutis, 3.2) they gained when they were "saved" (conservamnur) and

"protected" (servamnur). Cicero openly presumes that the people will offer thanks to the gods for

the man who founded their city, Romulus,169 but he means also to prompt them, with so much

emphasis on his role in the city' s salvation, to direct gratitude to the one who "saved" (\1't w~~ri

the city--Cicero himself.

Much of Cicero' s third speech is devoted to recounting the events that led up to the arrest

and confessions of four men intimately involved in the conspiracy (3.3-13). Cicero tells the

story from his own authoritative perspective, using many first-person verbs to describe his active

role in the proceedings: he was watchful (vigilavi; provide: 3.3), perceptive (sentirem; viderem:

3.4), committed (consumpsi, 3.4), informed (comprehenderem; comperi: 3.4), contemplative

(putavi, 3.4), vocal (vocavi, 3.5), revelatory (3.5: exposui; ostendi: 3.5; ostendi, 3.10), and

collaborative (consului, 3.13). The senate acknowledged all his labors, he reports (3.14), noting

in particular the virtute, consilio, and providentia ("courage, wisdom, and foresight") he

demonstrated, which "freed" (sit liberate) the republic from many dangers.

The senate decreed that a public thanksgiving be offered to the gods in Cicero's honor

(3.15). While Cicero takes pleasure in the distinction of being the first civilian (togato) to

receive such an honor, particularly because it was the also the first time that a thanksgiving had

been awarded for saving (conservata) the republic, he spends relatively little time speaking about

it. He seems more concerned with the people's impression of his deeds, as he continues to

review his role in detecting and defeating the conspiracy. He emphasizes again his remarkable






169 Romulus, as well as Marius (whom I discussed at the beginning of this chapter), represent the archetypes of
"founder" and "savior" with which Cicero seeks to equate himself. See Habicht (1990) 33.









the absolute authority to suspend usual legal procedures "when the public safety demanded

[it]."227 The problem he encountered, however, was that

.. [a] formal sentence by the Senate, which was not a court of law, lacked precedent and
ran counter to the citizen's legal right of appeal to the People against a death penalty ..
the Senate might vote for the execution of the five plotters, but as prime mover and
executive Cicero would become the target for reprisals.228

As consul, Cicero had good reason to be concerned about the political backlash of the senate's

decision. Consequently, in the Fourth Catilinarian, he stresses, "for the reassurance of senators

who feared that the physical force needed to carry through the executions was lacking, the sense

of the whole area being full of carefully prepared supporters."229 In emphasizing this prevailing

atmosphere of unanimity, Cicero could minimize the public perception of his personal

involvement in the executions, and thereby deflect responsibility "fairly and squarely on the

broad shoulders of the Senate."230

Cicero commences his speech with the observation, 'I see" (Video, twice in 4. 1). In the

last of a series of speeches that have relied extensively upon the concept of the visual, this word

provides a fitting segue to the orator's final exploration of this theme. As Cicero looks at his

audience, he sees his gaze returned by their eyes (conversos oculis). He also observes (video)

their anxiety about the danger to themselves, the republic, and to him as their consul. He then

evokes their remembrance of several locations in the city--including the Forum, the Campus

Martius, and the Senate house--and notes the symbolic meaning that they would have attached

to each (4.2). In focusing their attention right away on the visual (i.e. on what can either be seen


2 Mitchell (1971) 52-3.

2 Bailey (1971) 33.

2 Millar (1998) 110-11. See Catil. 4.14.

2 Stockton (1971) 135. See Robinson (1994) for a thorough analysis of Cicero's deflective techniques.









surroundings. They can clearly see the well-fortified place (ntunitissintus .. locus) in which

they are gathered; furthermore, they cannot overlook the faces and expressions (ora voltusque) of

the senators who sit within their midst. Cicero builds this crescendo of visual stimuli and peaks

with the exclamation, O tenspora, o mores! (1.2). Although the senate is now alerted to these

circumstances, the man responsible for them remains free! But, the senators can look to the

vigilance of their leader Cicero, who reminds them, consul videt.15

This introduction is followed by a show of humility as Cicero expresses regret for not

acting sooner to quash the conspiracy in its infancy (1.2-4). His sorrow, however, quickly gives

way to zeal as he segues into the arguntentatio of his speech. He asks, mentinistine ("do you

remember?"), a question directed to Catiline, but within this particular assembly, intended for

everyone's consideration (1.7). He then supplies the memorable details, all of which center

around his early awareness of the conspiracy: did they remember that Cicero had spoken (me .

dicere) about the treachery that was to occur on the 27th of October? Had he not been right about

the plot (Nunt me fefellit), just as he was right about other reports he had shared (Dixi ego ident),

and the precautions he took (nzea diligentia) which had blocked Catiline's moves against the

republic on more than one occasion (1.7-8)?

Cicero had warned Catiline that the aures et oculi of many would keep watch over his

every move (1.6). Now Cicero claims for himself eyes and ears superior to the rest as he

declares, nihil agis, nihil nzoliris, nihil cogita~s quod non ego non nzodo audia~n sed etia~n videa~n

plan2eque sentia~n (1.8). Nothing Catiline attempts will escape Cicero's observation, because

Cicero will "hear of it, see it, and know it all"156--a claim which imputes prescience to his



155 1.2: Senatus haec intellegit, consul videt: hic tamen vivit.

156 Translation from MacDonald (1977) 41.









reckless abandon of hedonism. He paints them thus:

Patrimonia sua profuderunt, fortunes suas obligaverunt; res eos iam pridem, fides
nuper deficere coepit: eadem tamen illa quae erat in abundantia libido permanent ...
Qui mihi accubantes in conviviis, complex mulieres impudicas, vino languidi,
conferti cibo, sertis redimiti, unguentis obliti, debilitati stupris eructant sermonibus
suis caedem bonormm atque urbis incendia (2.10).


Again Cicero recalls the extravagant estates belonging to men who can no longer afford them,

who yet persist in a manner of living that increases their debt. Cicero would openly question this

paradox later, asking, Tu agris, tu aedificiis, tu argento, tu familiar, tu rebus omnibus ornatus et

copiosus sis, et dubites de possession detrahert~r~rt~rtrt~rt~re adquirere ad fidem?72 His allusions to the

numerous properties and fine possessions of these men emphasize their gross materialism while

the graphic portrait above--rife with samples of their excessive behaviors--displays the

evidence of their descent into vulgarity. He describes their lifestyle with participles (accubantes,

complex, conferti, redimiti, debilitati) and substantive adjectives (languidi, obliti), thereby

defining the men in terms of their actions and appearance--and essentially stripping them of

individuality and conscience. Cicero's colorful words animate this disturbing scene and readily

imprint these images of Catiline' s degenerate companions within the people' s imaginations.

What citizen had not walked past the Palatine and seen the opulent residences there? Who

had not heard rumors of the wild parties of the rich? Cicero uses memories of things seen and

heard to reconstruct for his audience scenes so realistic that eventually his images become

conflated with reality. In his overview of Catiline' s friends, he focuses on visible signs of

depravity among the wealthy and relies on stereotyping to illustrate his warnings about slaves

and gladiators. Since these are the types of men that Catiline embraced, he concludes that their



72 2.18: "Could you be rich and abundant in your lands, houses, silver, household slaves, and all other possessions
and still doubt [whether] to subtract from your possession [in order] to add to your credit?"










the senate, and asked specifically about the Sibylline books, Lentulus suddenly confessed his

guilt (3.11).

Like Lentulus, Catiline and the other conspirators had also deceived themselves with the

trappings of a false religion. When Cicero spoke to Catiline in the senate on November 8th, he

exposed Catiline's intent to meet up with Manlius and his camp that was assembling at Etruria

(1.24; Cf. 2. 13-4). In preparation for his departure, Catiline had apparently sent some men ahead

with military weapons and accoutrements, but Cicero noted one item in particular that seemed

most incongruous as insignia for his enemy army: the silver eagle (aquilamn .. argenteamn).

This standard had been implemented in the legionary insignia by Marius years before, so it

possessed a certain historical appeal.222 Jupiter also was associated with this symbol, as the

eagle was his sacred bird. Cicero, however, dismisses Catiline's attempts to use the emblem of

this bird for his benefit. Though he had set up a shrine at his home for worshiping (venerari) this

eagle, this seeming holy place proved instead to be a "shrine of wickedness" (sacrarium

scelerum)223 foT One whose "impious hand" (impiamn dexteramn) could readily go from altar

(altaribus)tt~~~tt~~~ttt~~ to slaughter (necem).224 The gods did not recognize his worship (nor that of his

followers) because his sacrilegious actions rendered it vain.225

Cicero repeatedly emphasizes the conspirators' gross irreverence for the gods and their

sacred places. Again and again, he speaks of the enemy's desire to violate the holy temples

templea, 1.12, 33; 2.29; 3.2, 22; 4.2), the sacred shrines (delubra, 3.2, 22; 4.2) and even the

222 MacDonald (1977) 56 n. b.

223 Catiline's sacrarium stands in stark contrast to the legitimate delubrum of the gods. Though both of these terms
mean "shrine" or "sanctuary," Cicero never interchanges them in the Catilinarians.

224 Cicero presents a similar contrast between the sacred and the profane in 1.16. Since Catiline had attempted to kill
Cicero, he wonders "by which rites" (quibus .. sacris) his dagger had been "consecrated" initiatea) and
"dedicated" (devota) in order to (justifiably) thrust it into a consul.

225 ITOnically, Cicero himself would later suffer charges of "religious sacrilege" concerning his handling of matters
in the conspiracy. See Barlow (1994) for an interesting article that explores this subject.










Maccari, C. Public domain. "Image:Maccari-Cicero.j pg." Wikipedia. 16 Jan. 2007.
.

MacDonald, C., tran. 1977. Cicero: hI Catilinant I-IY, Pro 2urena, Pro Sulla, Pro Flacco.
Cambridge.

MacKendrick, P. 1995. The Speeches of Cicero: Context, Law, Rhetoric. London.

Maclardy, A.A. 2004. Completely Parsed Cicero: The First Oration of Cicero Against Catiline.
Wauconda, IL.

May, J.M. 2002. "Ciceronian Oratory in Context." In Brill 's Companion to Cicero: Oratory and
Rhetoric, edited by, J. M. May, pp. 49-70. Boston.

-.1988. Trials of Character: The Eloquence of Ciceronian Ethos. Chapel Hill.

May, J.M and J. Wisse, trans. 2001. Cicero: On the Ideal Orator (De Oratore). Oxford.

McDermott, W.C. 1972. "Cicero's Publication of His Consular Orations." Philologus 116.2:
277-84.

"metaphor, n." OED Online. Dec. 2001. Oxford University Press. 12 July 2007

Millar, F. 1998. The Crowd in Rome in the Late Republic. Ann Arbor.

Mitchell, T.N. 1971. "Cicero and the Senatus Consultunt Ultinsun." Historia 20: 47-61.

-.1979. Cicero: The Ascending Years. New Haven.

Morstein-Marx, R. 2004. Ma~ss Oratory and Political Power in the Late Roman Republic.
Cambridge.

Mueller, H.-F. 1993. "Images of Excellence: Visual Rhetoric and Political Behavior." In Teoria
E Prassi Politica Nelle Opere Di Plutarco (Atti del V Convegno plutarcheo, Certosa di
Pontignano, 7-9 guigno 1993), edited by I. Gallo and B. Scadigli, pp. 287-300. Napoli.

Nisbet, R.G.M. 1965. "The Speeches." In Cicero, edited by T.A, Dorey, pp. 47-79. New York.

Olujic, M.B. 1998. "Embodiment of Terror: Gendered Violence in Peacetime and Wartime in
Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina."M medical Anthropology Quarterly 12. 1: 31-50.

Oxford Latin Dictionaly. 1982. Edited by P.G.W. Glare. Oxford.

Parker, H. 2001. "Loyal Slaves and Loyal Wives." In Women and Slaves in Greco-Rontan
Culture: Differential Equations, edited by J. Murnagham, S.R. Murnagham, and S.
Murnaghan, pp. 152-73. New York.




Full Text

PAGE 1

1 CATILINARIAN ORATIONS By ANGELA BROOK MILLER REED A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF TH E REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007

PAGE 2

2 2007 Angela Brook Miller Reed

PAGE 3

3 amabilissimae meae magistrae Mrs. Linda Renick

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank my supervising committee chair, Dr. Lewis Sussman, for his patient mentoring and expertise, Dr. Timothy Johnson for his guidance and support, and Dr. Hans Friedrich Mueller for planting the seed that became this study. I am gratefu l to the Department of Classics at the University of Florida for being my academic home for the last seven years and to those graduate students who helped me survive my first year Jarrod, Becky, Jennifer, Will, Andy, Jon, and Randy. I am thankful to my ch urch family for their encouragement through gifts of food during the final weeks of writing, which gave me the strength to complete this project. I especially thank my parents, Tim and Renee Miller, f or both inspiring and grounding me with their love and for reminding me of what matters most in life. And finally I thank my husband David, who brought me back to Gainesville to finish what I started and has since endured with me through countless hours of study. I am grateful for his sacrifices, his partne rship, and his love.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 7 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 8 Classical Authors and Works ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 8 Classical Journals ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 9 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 10 CHAPTER 1 CICERO ON RHETORIC ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 11 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 11 Interpretation ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 15 Setting of the Catilinarians ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 18 2 THE ENEMY PERCEIVED ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 21 Introduc tion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 21 A Portrait of Catiline ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 22 Associates of Catiline ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 26 Cons piracy as Pestis ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 32 3 A RAVAGED RES PUBLICA ................................ ................................ ................................ 36 Res Publica at Risk ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 36 Rumor and Report ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 38 Failed Plots ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 40 Slaves and Gladiators ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 42 Slaughter, Arson, and Looting ................................ ................................ ......................... 43 Evidence in Hand ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 46 4 THE CONSUL SEES ALL ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 55 The Importance of Ethos ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 57 Maintaining Appearances ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 60 A Visionary Consul ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 61 Imperator Togatus ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 64 Savior of the Republic ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 67

PAGE 6

6 5 DIVINE OVERSIGHT ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 72 Religion in Speech Making ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 72 Providentia ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 74 His Temple ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 74 His Statue ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 77 Other Portents ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 84 The Temple of Concord ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 88 6 ................................ ............................ 94 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 96 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 101

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1 Painting by Cesare Maccari (1840 1919), Cicero Denounces Catiline ............................ 35

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Classical Authors and Works Arist. Aristotle Poet Poetics Rhet Rhetoric Cic. Marcus Tullius Cice ro Att Epistulae ad Atticum Cael Pro Caelio Catil In Catilinam Cons. fr De Consulatu suo De Orat De Oratore Inv De Inv entione Mur Pro Murena Off De Officiis Orat Orator Part Partitiones Oratoriae Sul Pro Sulla Plin. Gaius Plinius Secundus Nat Naturalis Historia Quint. Marcus Fabius Quintilianus Inst Institutio Oratoria Rhet. Her. Rhetor ad Herennium ( Rhet orica ad Herennium ) Sall. Gaius Sallustius Crispus Cat Catilinae Jug Iugurtha

PAGE 9

9 Classical Journals AJPh American Journal of Philology CJ The Classical journal CPh Classical Philology G&R Greece and Rome HSPh Harvard Studies in Classical P hilology JRS Journal of Roman Studies SyllClass Syllecta Classica TAPhA Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts CATILINARI AN ORATIONS By Angela Brook Miller Reed August 2007 Chair: Lewis Sussman Major: Latin As a great orator and literary stylist, Marcus Tullius Cicero had a talent for employing words to evoke vivid pictorial images. In his four orations against the conspir ator L. Sergius Catilina ( In Catilinam 1 4 ), Cicero employs this technique, which the Greeks called enargeia with the aid of certain stylistic devices and a pattern of imagery that centers around sight and in the minds of his listeners, is integral to his persuasive strategy in the Catilinarians Many scholars have speculated on the historical accuracy of the events and characterizations recorded in these four speeches; however, such disputes do not concern us here. Rather, this study will emphasize the literary aspects of the Catilinarians through a close study theo ry employs imagery in persuasion. Then in the following chapters the Catilinarian orations his portrayal of the following: Catiline and his supporters, the in security of the res publica substantially to the persuasive pow er of his oratory.

PAGE 11

11 CHAPTER 1 CICERO ON RHETORIC An anonymous Latin proverb goes thus: Campus habet lumen, et habet nemus auris acumen. been echoed throughout the centuries by such notable authors as Chaucer, Cervantes, and Tennyson. 1 In fact, Marcus Tullius Cicero may have had this thought in mind when he said, as recorded in his First Catilinarian : multorum te etiam oculi et aures non sentientem, sicut adhuc fece runt, speculabuntur atque custodient 2 and keeping watch upon you unawares oculi and aures seem a close parallel to the lumen and auris of the proverb. These concurrent images serve as a reminder that one cannot hide from the world; despite attempts to fade into oblivion, one will always encounter observation, even unwittingly. Thus, with the aid of vivid sensory imagery, Cicero passes along a stern warning to Catiline that his evil character will never go unnoticed. oculi et aures other authors have crafted images of sight and perception to enhance the vividness of their style. In the Old Testament book of Prover bs, the 3 thus describing the God given parts of the body in terms of their relationship and benefit to the whole. In keeping with his succinct style, the writer of Proverb s uses a literary device known as metonomy, substituting qualities (seeing and hearing) for their proper names (visual and auditory 1 Original author unknown. See 16 th ed. (1992) 130:14 and accompanying footnote for a list of related quotations. This sen timent has been repeated so often that it is now considered clich. 2 Catil. 1.6. The Latin text of the Catilinarians is adopted from the Oxford Classical Texts. 3 Prov. 20.12, KJV.

PAGE 12

12 senses), to animate his point. William Butler Yeats employs the related device synecdoche, substituting a part for the whol e or the whole for a part, in one of his last poems. Contemplating 4 with which he admonishes his readers to glance upon the start and finish of life seems to enc suggests that this glance be brief and uninvolved. Synecdoche allows Yeats to substitute a part (the eye) for the whole (introspective observation of life), which well conveys the starkness in his admonition. These devices of metonomy and synecdoche fall under the broader category of metaphor, action different from, bu 5 Examples of in mourning, vividly recalls the life of his father; 6 7 Modern readers might equate this eye with the memory or imagination; nevertheless, metaphor allowed these writers to describe by analogy something for which they had no scientific und erstanding. They conveyed a seemingly invisible concept (the imagination) by comparing it to an image (the eye) that was visible and familiar. 4 11. 5 OED Online 6 Hamlet 1 .2.185. 7

PAGE 13

13 Metaphor has a tradition extending from the ancient world. Aristotle, in the earliest extant discussion of meta phor, outlined its types and functions in his Poetics 8 Cicero would take up the topic later in book three of his De Oratore simile abbreviated to a single word and offering pleasure from the recognition of like 9 He then outlines four reasons why people appreciate metaphor: it is a mark of natural talent; it gives intellectual stimulation; it offers a compressed identification (in a single word) of both terms of comparison; and it provides sensual and visu al stimulation. 10 In fact, he notes how metaphor 11 Such a point could hardly metaphor, in additi on to its value as a literary device, had powerful application as a rhetorical device in antiquity. De Oratore confirm that Cicero was well versed in stylistic devices such as metaphor and, likewise, thoroughly acquainted with imagery. 12 He knew, as an accomplished speaker, that with a sleight of tongue he could manipulate the emotions of his audience. He understood, as a rhetorician, that by scaling down his images via metonomy or synecdoche, he coul d intensify the drama of his speech. 13 The total 8 Poet. 21 2. 9 De. Orat 3.157. May (2001) 270 n. 195 stresses the difficulties with this passage and opts for deletion. Translation is from Innes (1988) 316. 10 De Orat 3.159 61. 11 Ibid. 3.160: vel quo d omnis translatio, quae quidem sumpta ratione est, ad sensus ipsos admovetur, maxime oculorum, qui est sensus acerrimus. 12 Ibid. 3.156 65; cf. Orat 39.137 39; see also the contemporaneous Rhet. Her later comments in Inst. 8.6.4 28. Cicero also composed a good deal of poetry, though he is not especially renowned for his efforts. See W.W. Ewbank, The Poems of Cicero (London 1933). 13 In short, this scale change is accomplished when experience is described in terms of other experience, but at a different level of

PAGE 14

14 combined effect of these techniques helped to achieve what the Greeks referred to as enargeia in the l pictures 14 Cicero relished the visually potent effect that recreated scenes before the very eyes of his audiences. Quintilian, moreover, emphasizes how enargei a so much to narrate as to exhibit the actual scene, while our emotions will be no less actively 15 enargeia contributes to the overall persuasiveness of a speech, with an aim toward influencing behavior. 16 As will be shown, Cicero did not haphazardly inject imagery into his speeches; he was critically mindful of the appropriate usage of oratorical devices and technique. Thus, he had a distinct purpose for every image and manipulated their scale according to his objectives. 17 persuasive strategy in the Catilinarians An examination of the literary and rhetorica l devices within the speeches De Oratore lends support to the argument that Cicero liberally and deliberately employs images of sight and perception (which, for the purpose of this paper, is also referred to as visual imagery) to accomplish four distinct yet interconnected goals with his speeches First (1), Cicero dramatizes his enemy. He encourages his listeners to view Catiline as a wicked conspirator, magnification. As will be discussed in a later chapter, devices of scale change easily become devices of scale manipulatio n, a form of power. 14 Corbett (1965) 319. Cf. Fantham (2004) 272. Cicero mentions the same in De Orat 3.160 61: omnis translatio, oculorum mu lto acriora, quae paene ponunt in conspectus animi, quae cernere et videre non possumus 15 Inst. 6.2.32. Translation borrowed from Corbett (1965) 27. 16 Mueller (1995) 293. 17

PAGE 15

15 armed and allied with men of the meanest ilk. Then (2), he illustrates the grave danger that threatens the Roman people and the city Rome, appealing to their fears to stimulate their allegiance to the republic. Next (3), he rallies the Senate and the masses to his cause, position ing himself as their omniscient leader and savior, whom all can look to for guidance. Lastly (4), he aligns himself with the gods and their divine oversight thus securing divine sanction for his suppression of the conspiracy and uniting all Romans in th eir retributive action against the conspirators Thus, enargeia ) is actually his artistic and careful contributes substantia lly to the persuasive power of his oratory in the Catilinarians Interpretation The historical accuracy of events surrounding the Catilinarian orations has been much debated. 18 However, this study does not propose to evaluate historical evidence in Cicero speeches. Nor is this an attempt to discuss or analyze his representation of events by judging his personal motives, since a persuasive text, by its very nature, tends more to illuminate the subjective character of its author than to reveal objective f act. The aim, rather, is to delve into the literary world that Cicero creates within his four speeches against Catiline a world and reality unto itself for the purpose of persuading his audience in order to appreciate a history richly illustrated just as the orator wanted it recorded and remembered. 18 Yavetz (1963) 485 87 has outlined four categories into which historical critical discussions of the conspiracy may be organized. For simplicity, I have placed the discussions into two categories, which follow. The traditional account (as given by Cicero in the Catilinarians and Sallust in the Bellum Catillinae ) has been largely upheld by E.G. Hardy, The Catilinarian Conspiracy in Its Context: A Restudy of the Evidence (Oxford 1924); E.D. Eagle, Concordia Ordinum Phoenix 3.1 (1949); H.H. Sc ullard, From the Gracchi to Nero (London 1965); D.R. Shakleton Bailey, Cicero Historia 25.4 (1976); and T.N. Mitchell, Cicero: The Ascending Years (New Haven 1979). Challenges to the traditional a ccount have issued from D.R. Dudley, The Civilization of Rome (New York 1960) see p. 92; K.H. Historia Historia 22.2 (1973). For a moderate, more recent interpretati on of the conspiracy, see A. Everitt, (New York 2003) 87 112.

PAGE 16

16 Most speeches, as Fantham points out, were fully written prior to oral delivery. The text 19 remarks in a letter imply that his Catilinarians were not published as a corpus until 60 BC, about three years after the events of the conspiracy. 20 Scholars generally concur on this date of publication, though some have looked suspiciously on its timing, noting influenced his editing of the speeches for the public record. 21 This leaves the reader with a transcript that, to modern sensibilities, seems to compromi se the original interchange. In effect, one cannot know how accurately the extant text reflects what was actually said. 22 At the same time, one must be mindful not to approach the text too cynically. Contemporary readers have a tendency to impose modern preconceptions upon the ancient world, expecting a precision from the texts that was never intended by the authors. Therefore, should take care not to be over i ndulgent to much ancient historical writing on the grounds that 23 Although he never wrote a history of Rome, it may be presumed that Cicero would have made a model historian in the ancient view bec 19 Fantham (2004) 132. 20 Att 2.1.3. 21 See Craig (1993) 256 58; Kennedy (1972) 176 77; Stockton (1971) 118ff; Nisbet (1965) 62 3. C f. Steel (2005) 51 3 who leaves open the possibility that Cicero may be editing previously published work in 60 BC. For a contrary view, see McDermott (1972) 284 who concludes that the Catilinarian speeches were published right after the conspiracy, in De cember of 63 BC. Price (1998) 108 n. 10 appears to agree, emphasizing that Cicero would have 22 Millar (1998) 109. Specifically referencing Catil. 1 and 2, he 23 Rawson (1972) 44.

PAGE 17

17 prized in antiquity. 24 separate realms; the man who attempts to be both the one and the other often endangers his credibility (American society in particular tends to reinforce this dichotomy). nderneath, but looked at, for it is the stuff of 25 Correspondingly, it is best to withhold judgment on rhetorical methods that seem theatrical, proud, or demeaning; Cicero was a man of the ancient world not the modern therefo re he speaks more authoritatively than the modern reader concerning issues and events of his day. 26 the saying goes). Let him instead appreciate the text of the speeches as a lite rary encapsulation of the political drama of a moment in time. Therein lies the value of these oratorical texts. As early as 60 BC, Cicero described his consular orations of 63 BC as offering a model for study by Roman youths. 27 In fact, Quintilian foun d the First Catilinarian to be a ripe source of rhetorical exempla as evidenced by seventeen quotations from the speech that appear in books eight and nine of his Institutio Oratoria 28 His use of the speech as a model for teaching principles of oratory a in pedagogy suggests that it is appropriate for modern readers to approach the Catilinarians likewise. We must view them, not as a perfect transcript of events but, rather, as a dem onstration 24 Rawson (1972) 45. Atticus expressed similar thoughts, accord ing to Att. 14.14.5 and 16.13.2, which Cicero champions later in De Orat 2.36. See D. S. Potter (1999) 135 38 for the negotiation between fact and style in the 25 Cape (1995) 256. 26 May (2002) 50; Cf. Nisbet ( 1965) 62. 27 Att 2.1.3. 28 Leeman (1986) 133.

PAGE 18

18 statesman nts offers one a glimpse of Cicero the orator at his highest peak of performance. He did, after all, 29 Setting of the Catilinarians Without the electronic media and press as exists tod ay, the Roman people were very dependent upon the spoken word in political discourse. Through a mastery of oratory, therefore, even an upstart or novus homo like Cicero could acquire political power. 30 Undoubtedly, the young student Cicero must have recog 31 In attaining the consulship he acquired not only political stature but also social authority, impressionable attention by revealing to them in contione the inner workings of the republic. 32 In his role as newscaster to the public, Cicero made the most of rumors circulating that Catiline had intended to assassinate him. 33 He may have even originated the rumors, 34 but whatever the case, he acted as if the reports were true, appearing at the elections in July of 63 BC with a breastplate imperfectly hidden beneath his toga. This bold move fed the sensationalist appetite of the public and placed pressure 29 Brutus 308 33. 30 To the chagrin of conservatives and old line Roman families who had for generations controlled t he reins of power. See Scullard (1965). 31 Butler (2002) 5. 32 Morstein Marx (2004) 251. 33 Catil. 1.11; Mur. 52. 34 Eagle (1949) 25.

PAGE 19

19 Furthermore, his act prefigured a major theme cedant arma togae 35 Cicero, the imperator togatus Catiline, not with swords, but with the mighty artillery of his words. 36 records of his alleged first conspiracy in 66 65 BC are clouded by uncertainty, invective, and propagand a, 37 his regular prosecution in court (despite subsequent acquittals) was enough to warrant bad press. 38 What is clear is that by late 63 BC Catiline had become involved in illegal revolutionary activities that, as Everitt suggests, may have originated as a 39 conspiracy posed in actuality, the movement itself was indicative of widespread discontent with the current political/social system. 40 Such an atmosphere begged for a leader, and the politically dead ended Catiline saw it as a golden opportunity. Cicero, however, was consul at the time and as the rightfully elected leader would hardly Instead Cicero would wield his power less conspicuously than Catiline, although his political office granted him considerable official and unofficial authority. Rather than take up arms, he would report the events. oculi et aures would appraise the situati on in Rome. What he saw and heard, he would convey to the senate and the people with imagery so vivid that his listeners could 35 Off 1.77. 36 May (1988) 57. This theme will be discussed in chapter 4. 37 Everitt (2003) 90 1; Ramsey (1982) 131; Phi llips (1976) 441; Gruen (1969) 21; Seager (1964) 342. Much of the In Toga Candida what fragments we have are preserved by Asconius 82 94 C. For this speech, see Crawford (1994) 159 99. 38 MacDonald (1977) 3 6. 39 Everitt (20 03) 101. 40 Hadas (1952) 114).

PAGE 20

20 experience vicariously the events he described. By appealing to the senses, Cicero would rely on authority that could scarcely be argued observational proof. In so doing, he would construct a like a divining rod that is oriented to water, the media are by nature oriented to what is novel and dramatic. In their emphasis and selective reporting of newsworthy happenings, they help to fashion a picture of reality and define for others what is important or unimportant. 41 Catilinarians helped him convince all of Rome would aim first at persuading the s visibly depraved Catiline out of Rome. 41 Rosnow and Fine (1976) 105. Italics mine.

PAGE 21

21 CHAPTER 2 THE ENEMY PERCEIVED Introduction charge that Caelius had pursued familiaritas with the conspirator Catiline ( Cael 10 14). He mollifies this allegation with the acknowledgment that many other men, indeed many good patrician men, had shared an association with Catiline. To underscore his point, he admits that Catiline had nearly deceived him thwarting his conspiracy against the Roman Republic. 42 that Catiline had on his client. 43 His endeavor to defend Caelius demonstrates that Cicero, though adapting his rhetori c to suit the occasion, continued to view Catiline as a narrowly averted threat to the safety of Rome. Indeed, his characterization given seven years after the ch aracter remains fundamentally the same as it was in his speeches of 63 BC. Granted, some political invective, this is likely the case. 44 But, as Mitchell points ou t, even the allegations of 45 42 Me ipsum, me, inqu am, quondam paene ille decepit ( Cael defense. 43 Mitchell (1979) 222. Price (1998) 118 n.3 44 Everitt (2003) 90. Cf. Phillips (1976) 441. 45 the forensic and political invective which

PAGE 22

22 It is precisely this need for credibility that led Cicero to point out all the observable manifestations of his claims in the Catilinarians In this chapter we consider how the orator uses the evidence is apparent to all who follow his line of sight. A Portrait of Catiline Cicero begins his First Catilinarian appalled to see Catiline present in the senate. 46 Being thus offended, he launches into the invective that would characterize his fir st oration. He 47 Such an opening immediately sets Catiline in opposition to the speaker and his listeners, alluded to in the possessive p ronoun nostra Cicero summarily recounts specific examples of the heightened security and increased tensions in the city, seeking to know Nihilne te. moverunt? is implied in his six repetitions of nihil His catalog of visible evidence recalls what all have witnessed and by association these images indict Catiline, who is clearly Cicero wastes no time with formalities. To the point, he declares his disbelief that a man so dangerous as Catiline is yet allowed to live a man whose oculi observe and single out each one of them for slaughter. 48 and all the varied charges of criminality and immorality, particularly those in sources such as the In Toga Candida and the Commentariolum Petitionis which predate the conspirac 46 According to Sallust ( Cat thorough expos of the conspiracy. Cf. Cic. Catil. 1.1,2. 47 Catil. 1.1. This and subsequent tr anslations are mine, unless otherwise indicated. 48 notat et designat oculis ad caedem unum quemque nostrum

PAGE 23

23 distant vantage point to a close encounter with the enemy. With his magnification, he reinforces the danger that Catiline poses to all present, as indicated in his shifty eyes that presumably conceal diabolic intentions. Cicero continues to rely on visual references as he depicts for the audience his impression of the man Catiline. In 1.5 he describes the scene of an enemy camp in Etruria; he then brings the danger into close range, announcing that the commander of that camp and leader of enemies sits before their very eyes ( videtis ). He does not sit idly; rather, he plots in public view within the city walls ( intra moenia ) and even in the Senate ( in senatu ) making daily preparations for the destruction of the Republic. That an enemy lives intra moenia obviously compromises the secur ity of the city; that this same enemy has gained access to the inner sanctum of political power in senatu is an infiltration of extreme urgency. Cicero recalls these broken defenses to reinforce a discomfiting truth: there is a traitor in their midst. Th ough he vows to keep Catiline physically contained by guards as a preventative measure, the oculi et aures of many will still be watching, waiting for Catiline to slip up and betray himself (1.6). the beginning of the first speech. 49 mere appearance into covert invasion. Cicero then introduces images of concealment to ity for deceit. 50 Why should Catiline continue his charade (1.7)? Night cannot hide ( obscurare ), nor can walls enclose ( continere ) the evidences of his deceit, Cicero reasons. Everything has in fact come to light ( inlustrantur ) and has burst forth 49 Konstan (1993) 14. 50 Ibid.

PAGE 24

24 ( erump unt ) in full view. 51 All efforts that Catiline might make to conceal his plans are futile since they are now clearer than daylight ( luce sunt clariora ) to Cicero and the senators. After recounting in detail the nefarious plots of Catiline in 1.7 10 and ex horting him to leave the city in 1.10 13, 52 He puts another rhetorical question to Catiline: quae libido ab oculis, quod facinus a manibus umquam tuis, quod flagitium a toto corpore afui t (1.13)? Cicero prods the senators, whose eyes oculis ) of Catiline, whose hands ( manibus ) are given to crime and whose entire body ( toto corpore ) is complicit i n scandal. Synecdoche reduces Catiline to the vileness of his parts, suggesting a detachment both horrible and unnatural. The enargeia of his description is powerful, but Cicero does not end with this picture alone. In his continued censure of Catiline, he reminds the how they shunned him at his entrance and quickly vacated the seats nearest to him (1.16). Presumably, all maintained their distance during the spee ch, leaving Catiline visibly isolated and et si me meis civibus iniuria suspectum tam graviter atque offensum viderem, carere me aspectu civium quam infestis omnium oculis conspici mallem dubitas quorum mentis sensusque volneras, eorum aspectum praesentiamque vitare? ab eorum oculis aliquo concederes (1.17). Reasoning aloud, he presents the options to Catiline Since he has been publicly branded as mistrusted ( suspectum ) and offensive, just as he himself can witness ( me 51 Maclardy (2004) 55 notes how inlustrantur and erumpunt oppose, respectively, obscuarare and continere 52 Cicero so the senate should let him leave? S ee Craig (1993) 261. On the other hand, there are good tactical reasons for by so doing, Catiline proves

PAGE 25

25 viderem Cicero speaking as if Catiline), he must endure one of two consequences. He can either withdraw from t he sight of the citizens ( carere aspectu civium ) as Cicero would prefer, or suffer the gaze by the hostile eyes of all ( infestis omnium oculis ) Neither option would appeal to a Roman, for to be away from the city was exile and to be the object of t he uninhibited gaze 53 With this suggestion, Cicero directs all eyes to look without remorse upon the enemy of the state. As they scrutinize Catiline, Cicero asks him why he hesitates to avoid the sight and presence ( aspectum praesentiamque ) of those men he is harming. He reminds the senators what damage this man has done to their minds and hearts; he has threatened not just their external bodies, but has rather wounded them to the core of the ir being. By charging Catiline with terrorism, Cicero hopes to provoke an emotional response, or pathos from the intended victims. For evidence he points to the behavior of Catiline, who boldly sits without remorse in their presence ( praesentiam ), chall enging their gaze ( aspectum ). Hardy affirms that Catiline came to 54 but his blatant affront, to the contrary, demonstrated that he did not possess the proper sensitivities and pudor of a respectable Roman citizen. 55 In fact, Cicero perceived this same shameless nature when he later observed, Neque enim is es, Catilina, ut te pudor a turpitudine revocarit ( Catiline, to be reclaimed from disgrace by a sense of s such emotional displacement poses a considerable risk to the safety of others, he concludes, 53 Barton (1999) 255. In Roman society, the gaze had the power to confer respect, throug h inhibition, or to the loss of trust, the end of the collusion between the seer and the seen, the breakdown of a common bond and of the security and camaraderie created by the mutual inhibition of the eyes. The uninhibited gaze made every Thou an It 54 Hardy (1924) 66. 55 See Barton (1999) for the psycholog y of Roman pudor

PAGE 26

26 invoking for dramatic effect the voice of the patria for corroboration (1.18). large) serve, in the words of Vasaly: to focus the attention of his listeners on the crisis that was being played out before their eyes. Everything they saw and heard around them became a perceptibl e that now the very light and air of Rome could no longer hold any pleasure fo r him 56 What then is left for Catiline to do? Just as he would accept estrangement from his own parents if reconciliation were impossible and withdraw somewhere away from their oculis so he should admit alienation from the patria the common parent of th em all, and do likewise (1.17). feminine personification and prosopopoeia of the patria (in 1.18) crimes against the state, the communis parens seem most insidious and provides yet another aved that he would betray his own mother. his detriment. He invites the audience to see firsthand the guilt in his eyes, hands, and in his entire body. He als disregard for Rome and her people. Associates of Catiline rtraiture were not sufficiently revealing, Cicero turns next to 56 Vasaly (1993) 50.

PAGE 27

27 established. 57 Cat 14) unites Catiline with all manner of criminal and immoral persons, many of whom were bankrupted or impoverished because of extravagant spending. His ristocrats, a band of unprincipled and Bohemian young bloods, and, from the rural areas, dispossessed farmers and 58 high (i.e. senatorial) and low (servile) stat ions in life, affirming that the conspiracy was deeply and dangerously entrenched within the walls of Rome. This reputed community of profligates would prove a source of ample illustration for Cicero in his negative portrayal of Catiline. For the great minor attention. They are referred to collectively as a castra contra populum Romanum in 1 .5, though mention of their location in Italia in Etruriae faucibus ad ds visual proximity to the threat they represent. Cicero names certain members of the conspiracy, Gaius Manlius (1.7) and Marcus Laeca (1.8), when recounting the so called first Catilinarian conspiracy, 59 but offers few details beyond their involvement as partners in the same criminal madness. 60 Then Cicero eyes the senatorial crowd, noting that he clearly sees ( video enim ) a few of those who were with Catiline men whose ambition drives them toward the destruction of Rome (1.8 9). Cicero alludes further, supporters in his Second Catilinarian He portrays those who supported Catiline as lacking in integrity, despite their high born status (2.3), enemy soldiers in disguise, with their flashy purple 57 Hardy (1924) 52 58 Eagle (1949) 24. 59 For further information on the alleged first conspiracy of Catiline, see Gruen (1969), Phillips (1976), Seager (1964), and Waters (1970). 60 convenisse eodem compluris eiusdem amentiae scelerisque socios

PAGE 28

28 garments and skin glistening with oils (2.5), and debt ridden, but unwilling to part with their rich members who were privy to the conspiracy likely indicate his anxiety about the number of 61 Indeed, his display of knowledge about the secret goings on of the conspirators may have been intended to indicate his potential for revealing their complicity a bold move cal culated to flush out the sympathizers from their midst. 62 With each of his examples, Cicero seems also to draw out a common theme how appearance, or what is therefore, from magnifying the contradiction most apparent to all present: those entrusted with the public safety were among the traitors to the public trust. The very intimation of senatorial treachery made the rumors of another group alleged to have close ties w ith Catiline take on enlarged significance. Cicero first alludes to this group when he dubs Catiline the evocatorem servorum et civium perditorum The mere suggestion that he had allied himself with s laves, a claim affirmed by some scholars but completely dismissed by others, 63 was a powerful image likely to conjure up a host of negative associations, especially due to recent historical events namely, 71 BC. 64 Thus, when im planting the slave motif into his speech, the accumulated personal experiences, rumors, tales, and horror stories to which they had been 61 Mitch ell (1979) 228. 62 Price (1998) 126. 63 rejection, see Gruen (1974) 428 9 and MacDonald (1977) 13, 28, 60 n. a. 64 Stockton (1971) 103.

PAGE 29

29 exposed. Undoubtedly, much of their recall would stir up unpleasant emotion. mistrust, and even fear toward slaves. Although loyal slaves did exist, 65 many Romans viewed sl pietas lacking in fides and 66 Second Catilinarian which he delivered to the people the following day. He includes the gladiator in a corrupt to be his companion (2.7). Even toward the end of the speech, he reminds the crowd that every gladiator considers himself an intimate friend of Catiline (2.9) and would soon stand with his army to fight for his cause (2.24). up arms, as Yavetz convincingly a intent was anarchy. 67 In any case, this collaboration of runaway slaves represented the fulfillment of their worst nightmares and served, consequently, as a highly effective scare tactic. Yet Ci cero, while not relying exclusively on stereotyping, seems most definitely to profit from it at the expense (literally) of his enemies. He outlines a much clearer picture in 2.18 23 of six distinct groups, who for various reasons have allied themselves wi th Catiline. They include (1) the debt ridden wealthy who are unwilling to part with their rich estates; (2) politically frustrated debtors who hunger for power; (3) indebted Sullan veterans who partied themselves 65 Valerius Maximus, Appian, and Cassius Dio, among others, attested to the existence of loyal slaves. Many such stories existed as exempla made devices for showing the effects of the breakdown of society, while simultaneously offering an affirmation of its f exemplum literature in Roman society, see Parker (2001). Quotation occurs on p.153. For an overview of slave accounts, see Yavetz 1988: 158 60. 66 Parker (2001) 154 5. For the topos of the dec eptive slave in Greek and Latin comedy, see Harsh (1955). 67 Yavetz (1963) 493.

PAGE 30

30 into poverty; (4) financially ailing busi nessmen whose laziness and luxurious habits have brought about their ruin; (5) criminals of every sort; and (6) debauched and decadent young men, the first four g roups is financial insecurity resulting from debt. Hardy notes this as well, social and, above all, financial relief might appeal 68 Cicero points to the swiftness with which Catiline had collected a vast number of such ruined men, a force whose sheer size ( ingentem numerum 2.8 ) heightened their perceived threat. It is evident in his portrayal of these al to the oppressed. The motivation for both classes slaves, whose enslavement meant physical bondage, and senators, whose enslavement was to debt to join with Catiline was the promise of freedom. 69 Certainly, slaves figured in among the criminal elemen t of group five, while the senators Cicero suspected of treasonous activity fit in with groups one and two. Inherent in freedom, however, was a license that would appeal to men within all six groups: the license to pursue pleasure, free from financial wor ries. In his De Officiis Cicero explains his disapprobation of men who shamelessly follow their pleasures, likening them to animals. 70 luxury and to live a soft and effeminate lifestyle, but ho w honorable to live thriftily, strictly, with self 71 own. Indeed they appear, as he describes them, with all the trappings of decadence and the 68 Hardy (1924) 52. 69 Bradley (1978) 335. 70 Off 1.105 6 71 Translation from Griffin and Atkins (1991) 42.

PAGE 31

31 reckless abandon of hedonism. He paints them thus: Patrimonia sua profuderunt, fortunas suas obligaverunt; res eos iam pridem, fides nuper deficere coepit: eadem tamen illa quae erat in abundantia libido permanet . Qui mihi accubantes in conviviis, complexi mulieres impudicas, vino languidi, conferti cibo, sertis redimiti, unguentis obliti, debilitati stupris eructant sermonibus suis caedem bonorum atque urbis incendia (2.10). Again Cicero recalls the extravagant estates belonging to men who can no longer afford the m, who yet persist in a manner of living that increases their debt. Cicero would openly question this paradox later, asking, Tu agris, tu aedificiis, tu argento, tu familia, tu rebus omnibus ornatus et copiosus sis, et dubites de possessione detrahere, ad quirere ad fidem ? 72 His allusions to the numerous properties and fine possessions of these men emphasize their gross materialism while the graphic portrait above rife with samples of their excessive behaviors displays the evidence of their descent into vul garity. He describes their lifestyle with participles ( accubantes complexi conferti redimiti debilitati ) and substantive adjectives ( languidi obliti ), thereby defining the men in terms of their actions and appearance and essentially stripping them of colorful words animate this disturbing scene and readily What citizen had not walked past the Palatine and seen the opulen t residences there? Who had not heard rumors of the wild parties of the rich? Cicero uses memories of things seen and heard to reconstruct for his audience scenes so realistic that eventually his images become conflated with reality. In his overview of depravity among the wealthy and relies on stereotyping to illustrate his warnings about slaves and gladiators. Since these are the types of men that Catiline embraced, he concludes that their 72 ousehold slaves, and all other possessions

PAGE 32

32 character mu Conspiracy as Pestis Toward the end of the First Catilinarian Cicero concludes his invective with a frightening metaphor: the conspiracy is a pestis a cancer, and the root and seed of all evil. 73 In this illustration, Catilin a plague, even that threatens to decimate the populace of Rome He is an unseen evil, attacking from within and devastating if undetected and uneradicated. There can be no doubt about the terror of such an image to a soc iety with little medical defense against epidemic infection. 74 Furthermore, Cicero has stripped Catiline of his final vestige of human appearance; he is no longer a man, but a monstrous cancer and the breeding ground of all other pestilence and as pestis he will aim for the vital organs of the republic. Cicero urges the senate that the disease must be eradicated. Unless the senators scour the republic of every trace of pestis ( in venis atque in visceribus 1.31) of the republic. Clearly, Catiline threatens more than just the oculi et aures of the Roman people; he endangers the heart and life blood of the Roman government and threatens the safety of every citizen. Cicero expan ds the metaphor: just as a drink of cold water offers temporary relief to the man afflicted with illness, until he is wracked with more intense suffering, so the republic will gain quick security from the banishment of Catiline; but if his followers and co conspirators are not exiled with him, the pestis will enlarge (1.31). 73 1.30: stirps ac semen malorum omnium Cf. 1.11. 74 bounded by the values and truths accepted by society. An orator could rely on the stability and endurance of this ( Thus, the orator would tailor his appeals to benefit from the shared cultural experiences of his audience.

PAGE 33

33 Cicero bids the traitors to depart: sit denique inscriptum in fronte unius cuiusque quid de re publica sentiat (1.32). Let there be written, he says, on the brow ( in fronte ) of every citizen, his resolve to stand against the conspiracy for the sake of the republic. Cicero requests this explicit commitment from the senators, knowing that the citizens will follow their lead. If all Romans openly display what they feel about the republi c, the protector of their livelihood, the pestis of Catiline and his conspiracy will not prevail. With this final entreaty, Cicero unites himself with the senators against the Catilinarian threat to Rome. Though his careful and sustained development of th is metaphor, Cicero evokes dreadful images of plague and death which, by association, drench the conspirators in Roman blood. Cicero admonishes the senators for their inaction in the impending crisis, chiding them for neglecting the safety of their fellow citizens propter invidiam aut alicuius periculi metum envisioning cum bello vastabitur Italia, vexabuntur urbes, tecta ardebunt by war, her c the danger that Catiline may bring to the city, he imagines a future in which the devastation is evident. He reminds them to consider the damage that will also be done to their reputations, which will burn in a fire of unpopularity ( invidiae 75 Cicero, at the time of his first speech, did not know exactly how many supporters Catiline had among the crowd. Much of his rhetoric wa would also effectively distinguish the good men from the bad. 76 To this end, Cicero asks for ( perniciosa sentina 75 1.29: te non existimas invidiae incendio conflagraturum? 76 boni is what he must deci de and also bring about the majority

PAGE 34

34 1.12). We will exam ine in the next chapter how Cicero expands upon this metaphor to paint a horrific picture of Rome exposed to the plague of Catiline and his cronies.

PAGE 35

35 Figure 1. Painting by Cesare Maccari (1840 1919), Cicero Denounces Catiline

PAGE 36

36 CHAPTER 3 A RAVAGED RES PUBLICA Res Publica at Risk On November 8 th 63 BC, Cicero delivered his First Catilinarian before the Senate, Second Catilinarian delivered to the people on the following day sentinam 2.7 the leader has taken leave of the city, he stands convicted by his action of complicity in the conspiracy. But the danger has not yet been averted, only delayed; Cati line left in his wake many criminal partners, who remained in the city, awaiting his directives. Accordingly, Cicero proceeds to the second phase of his argumentation: namely, to convince Rome and all her citizens that a dire crisis is at hand by the hand of Catiline and his agents. To this end, Cicero devotes himself to illustrating the mass destruction of which the enemy is yet capable. By displaying a war torn, waste laid, fire ravaged Rome to the imagination of his listeners a predictive technique t hat the Auctor ad Herennium calls descriptio he arouses within them strong feelings of anger ( indignatio ) and pity ( misericordia ) 77 This stirring up of the emotions, or pathos relies heavily on sensory imagery and proves, as Cicero discusses at length in his De Oratore 78 to be a powerful means of persuasion. Thus he aims to convince all grave risk. 77 Rhet. H er 4.51. See also Webb (1997) 120. 78 De Orat 2.114 15; 121; 128 29; 176; 179 81; 185 211. Despite such a protracted discussion, Cicero actually manages to avoid the term pathos See May and Wisse (2001) 34 35.

PAGE 37

37 Quintilian offers several examples of how this vivid ill ustration (similar to descriptio above, but he uses the terms enargeia and repraesentatio ) renders the facts exprimi et oculis mentis ostendi 79 He notes in particular how an orator may augment the sympathies of his audience by recounting the sack of a city. 80 It is not enough, he suggests, for the speaker merely to report that a city had been stormed; in order conjure up in detail all the horrifying sights and sounds of the pillage from the flames seen pouring from the houses and temples to the wailing cries of women and children. 81 This is the precisely the strategy that Cicero employs in his Catilinarians By constructing potentiality (what might be) with all the vividness of reality indignatio and arouse odium within his audience 82 Catil. 2 and 3) show how greatly he depended on 83 He appeals first to their anxieties by making the most of rumors a nd reports that were circulating at the time, much of which had probably originated from claims made in the First Catilinarian 84 This strategy serves him well in the beginning when he discourses on the reputed immorality of his enemies 79 Inst 8.3.62 80 Inst. 8.3.67: Sic et urb ium captarum crescit miseratio 81 Inst. 8.3.67 8: 82 Solmsen (1968) 226,7 83 Fantham (1997) 114. 84

PAGE 38

38 and the manifold dan 85 To remedy this problem, Cicero emerges for his third speech with evidence conspicuously in hand. Displaying his presentation of visible and incontrovertible proof to the senate, he makes a powerful appeal to reason by substantiating his allegations against the conspirators all the while reminding his audience of what might have been had he not perceived the danger. Through the se efforts, Cicero hoped to arouse the passionate emotions and fears of the Roman citizens, ultimately persuading them to seek due vengeance upon the enemies of the republic. Rumor and Report In Pro Milone 64, Cicero responds to rumors that had circulated Oriculum in preparation for his firing of the c 86 reputation are not at all surprising. As a public figure, Cicero was frequently the subject of was therefore indispensable for an orator to acquire successful methods for managing the flames 85 Gruen (1974) 280. This quotation is also referenced by MacKendrick (1995) 62. 86 Laurence (1994) 71.

PAGE 39

39 Auctor ad Herennium (whom some have believed to be Cicero himself), outlines several techniques that an orator mi ght employ for alternately bolstering and debunking rumores to his benefit. 87 Because of its potential for malleability, rumor could hardly be trusted, especially when broadcast from the lips of a practiced speaker. One characteristic of rumor that lesse ned its spread largely by word of mouth, a report was often susceptible to revision and permutation. Indeed, as information was communicated among friends, it w 88 In addition to what would be lost due to failure of memory, it is estimated that only 40% of the original information would be reliably passed on after 4 int erchanges. 89 Yet another interesting phenomenon concerns how speculation became part of the oral tradition. As news passed from one person to the next, any deta 90 Cicero cites a number of rumors and reports to his advantage in the Catilinarians He 91 He slaves, while envisioning mass slaughter, raging fires, and looting throughout the city. Once 87 Rhet. Her 2.8 88 Laurence (1994) 63. 89 Ibid. 90 Ibid. 91 See Chapter 1, n. 37 for Catilinarian conspiracy. Quotation is from Everitt (2003) 90.

PAGE 40

40 as hearsay has been shown to do thus making Cicero the author and beneficiary of a self sustaining rumor mill. His objective, in stimulating this process was to cultivate the anxieties and fears of the people, and eventually harvest their loyalty in the impending danger. Failed Plots In his first speech, Cicero repeatedly asserts that Catiline is a murderer, posing a continuous threat to anyone who interferes with his ambitions. Cicero accuses him of plotting th plans tha t were postponed and then thwarted (1.7 8); he accuses him of slaughtering his former wife and son (1.14); 92 proscriptions) 93 to him as well (1.18). Cicero also reco unts the times when, as consul designate in 64, he had to defend himself 94 Additionally, he recalls the consular elections of July 63, reminding the audience that Catiline had intended to str ike him and others down on that occasion (1.11). In all likelihood, Cicero hoped his allusion to the elections would conjure up a vivid image of his appearance before the crowd that day resplendent in consular white, with the flash of a metal breastplate poorly concealed beneath his toga. 95 He admitted later that his attire had been selected more for its effect on the citizens than for his own 92 in Cat. 15.2. 93 MacDonald (1977) 50 n. a 94 Catil. 1.11: privata diligentia defendi 95 Eagle (1946) 25. Cf. Stockton (1971) 100; Phillips (1976) 442; Everitt (2003) 100.

PAGE 41

41 safety; and indeed, when the crowd beheld their consul armed in fear and danger, they rushed to his aid, just as h e had anticipated. 96 Cicero claims, too, that Catiline had planned to kill the consuls and other prominent men on the 29 th of December 66 (1.15) a coup frequently referred to as the first Catilinarian conspiracy. He repeats this account in other speech intention to massacre the Senate that day, 97 and his intent to seize the consulship by force. 98 99 it is clear from rances in court and his defeated campaigns for consular office that he was not a favorite of Roman voters. 100 future. Even if untrue, they still implanted viole nt images and impressions in the minds of political men who had experienced firsthand the personal scrutiny and exposure of living in the public eye. It is precisely this potentiality or the mere suggestion of it, that enables Cicero to capitalize on his hand, menacingly poised to strike his opponents just as he intends to wound his next victim, Rome. 96 Cic. Mur. 52: ut omnes boni animadverterent et, cum in metu et periculo consulem vi derent, id quod est factum, ad opem praesidiumque concurrerent 97 Cic. Mur. 81 98 Cic. Sul. 67 8. Cf. Sall. Cat 18.5. 99 Gruen (1969) 21. 100 He was indicted in 65 for extortion and in 63 for crimes during the Sullan proscriptions, though acquitted of the ch arges in both cases. He was disqualified from candidacy in the consular elections for 65, legally ineligible for 64 (he was still dealing with court proceedings following his indictment for extortion), and defeated in election for 63 and 62 thanks largely 6.

PAGE 42

42 Slaves and Gladiators rthrow the government stems from 101 As discussed in the previous chapter, the threat of a slave insurrection struck terror into the hearts of Roman citizens, whose recollec Though Cicero refers to slaves only once in his first speech, characterizing Catiline as an evocatorem servorum gladiatores 102 He readily envisions the gladiator and fugitivus plundering wealthy estates (2.19). He even foresees the days of battle, when gladiators contend with consuls and generals in hand to hand combat (2.24), though he assures the crowd later that Roman forces would subdue this most formidable group (2.26). as Yavetz concludes, [to] support his propaganda: conflagration, burglary and the release of slaves were all of the same cloth. It was difficult to control freed slaves in their fight against Roman 103 reinforces his claims about the destruction that would befall the city Fires and robberies, in the mindset of most Romans, were the casualties to be expected when slaves roamed at large; thus 101 Yavetz (1963) 493, however, treats the report as fact. Refer to Chapter 2, n. 22 for my summary on this topic. 102 And, of course, Spartacus and his first followers were gladiators a historical precedent that would have made 103 Yavetz (1963) 495.

PAGE 43

43 numerous references to these and other dan gers when stressing to his audience the far reaching Slaughter, Arson, and Looting caede in 1.2, 3, 6, 7, 16, 24, 2.6, 7, 10; necem in 1.24) and figurative ly, the murder of the fatherland ( parricidium in 1.17, 33). These violent crimes loom in the minds of the audience; but they quickly assume the more menacing silhouette of a knife as Cicero individualizes the mass slaughter some will die by tela (1.2, 15) or ferrum (1.13, 2.1, 2); others by sica (1.16, 2.1), gladius (1.32), or mucro (2.2); and yet others will fall by arma (2.13, 14, 15). In naming specific weapons, the orator uses metonymy to animate their shared function in the conspiracy: to kill. In s imilar fashion, he employs synecdoche to describe the particular talents of those who will bear the weapons. There are those who specialize in parricide and treason ( parricidas 2.22); those skilled in assassination and murder ( sicarios 2.22); those who will take up the arms of soldiers ( armati 1.24); and, of course, those trained in the gladiatorial schools ( gladiatores 2.7, 9, 24, 26). Cicero warns too of fires that will ravage the city. In almost every instance, he invokes this image in conjunction with slaughter, as in caed atque incendium which occurs four times (1.3, 6, 2.6, 10 though the terms caedis and incendium are mentioned twice in 2.10). The only reference to incendium in the city without any direct mention of slaughter is in 1.9, when Ci cero discloses the plans made by Catiline and the other conspirators at the house of Marcus Laeca. At that meeting, Cicero reveals, Catiline distributed tasks, allocated the regions of Italy, and assigned parts of the city for burning. The incendium in t his passage mentioned singly, implies

PAGE 44

44 that arson was a concerted effort in itself, and not merely a by product of the plans for slaughter. 104 Cicero focuses not only on the act of arson, but also on the action of it. Just as he had specified the various i mplements to be used in murdering, Cicero considers the instruments that will carry fire throughout the city. These tools of conflagration include torches ( faces ; 1.13, 32) and burning arrows ( maleolos 1.32), both of which are listed secondly, as accompa niments to weapons of slaughter. Cicero then brings the burning closer, prompting his audience to imagine the heat of the flames. In his appeal to the people (2.1), he reports that Catiline had threatened ferro flammaque as he took leave from the city. 105 This metaphor offers the audience a close up view of sword and flame that places them in the midst of attack, where they can see the sharpness of the blade and feel the ferocity of the blaze. This scene, Cicero recalls, should hardly be a surprise since Catiline was known to supply readily the to each one of his entranced and impassioned disciples (1.13). With his singeing rhetoric, Cicero sets Rome aflame. He uses the future tense verb ardebunt (1.29) and the future participle inflam manda (1.32), to vivify the flames hungrily consuming the buildings and the city. He does not, however, suspend the horror of the scene for long. Every fire eventually dies; thus he invites his audience to glimpse even further into the future and witness for themselves the charred aftermath. He envisions the remains of Rome with her homes and people destroyed as evidenced in cinere urbis et in sanguine civium 104 The fear of incendium was great and well justified in a city that lacked a fire department and fire suppression technology. 105 In t his example, Cicero is blending metonymy and synecdoche. First of all, the iron and the flame are parts representing a larger whole, the sword and the fire; this is a function of synecdoche. Second, Cicero is substituting these images for their associate d uses as tools to kill and destroy which is a function of metonymy. Cf. ferrum in 1.13.

PAGE 45

45 Looting and burglaries thr oughout the city comprise yet another series of ruinous images that Cicero parades before the crowd as vividly as if fact. He forecasts that, amid the havoc, thieves ( latrones ; 1.33, 2.7) under the command of that chief of bandits, Catiline (2.24) will de scend upon the state to ransack the residences and public places of Rome. Pillagers and plunderers ( praedatores and direptores 2.19) will swarm to the melee, pillaging the city ( latrocinium rapina 2.10) 106 With or without the conspiracy, Catiline will not be derailed; for, who can stop a man who prefers death in the pursuit of brigandage ( latrocinantem present active participle emphasizes how unceasi has dominated his life. Despite living outside the city walls, it seems that Catiline is still downfall. In app 107 Clearly, the profuse number of references in the text to these specific perils is evidence in support of his 108 which suggests that Cicero was cognizant of various rumors circulating at the time and realized how to exploit them 106 Rapina appropriate, and in this context, relevant, trans lation. Rape has a long history as a weapon in times of war. In her study of war rape crimes in Bosnia ysical and moral attack against women, as raping of that 107 Stockton (1971) 120). 108 upr perspective, his conclusion is difficult to defend.

PAGE 46

46 in the case of the senators, most feared for the security of their possessions more than the well being of the republic. 109 directly to the practical f ears of the people. 110 Correspondingly, he commences his address to the people in 2.1 with the declaration, non in campo, non in foro, non in curia, non denique intra domesticos parietes pertimescemus nor indeed even within the walls of our own homes a sentiment which, for its suggestiveness, serves to alert fear rather than allay it. Throughout the course of this speech, Cicero, in the guise of protector and comforter to the people inspires their fear by informing it. Although images of ruination abound in both the first and second speeches Cicero has yet to provide substantial proof of these dangers. 111 deadly schemes ever came to fruition only that they were obstructed and publicized, by Cicero. As events might occur. In the next section, we will see how Cicero procured enough seeming proof s reality. Evidence in Hand If Cicero was to prevent his attack on Catiline from being interpreted as only conspiracy theory, he needed to present compelling hard evidence. Prior to his delivery of the Third Catilinarian the only ostensible evidence tha t Cicero could point to in support of his conspiracy 109 Cape (1995) 263. 110 Konstan (1993) 25. 111 Waters (1970) 196.

PAGE 47

47 status q uo within the city i.e., the continued safety of Rome and her citizens further confirmed that all had indeed been saved from ruin when Catiline left (2.2). However, Cicero nd speech, he expected to hear the report that Catiline was marching at the head of an enemy army (2.14 5). In traitorous association continually threatened the pu blic safety (2.4, 6). In less than a month, Cicero arranged and executed a plan to flush some of these enemies out of hiding. His efforts were fruitful, resulting in the arrest and confession of a number of prominent men on the 2 nd and 3 rd of December. Triumphantly, Cicero announces this news to the people on December 3 rd in his third speech, avidly detailing the success of his sting operation and the subsequent hearing before the senate in which letters, seals, confessions, and guilty expressions conv icted these men of conspiring with Catiline to make war against the Roman republic. Cicero opens loftily with the words Rem publicam which he then defines in terms that people value their lives, properties and possessions, wives, children, and the city, the very heart of the empire (3.1). Right away, these domestic comforts are juxtaposed with the imagery of flamma atque ferro as Cicero informs the audience that on that very day the republic had been videtis n as a whole, Cicero continually emphasizes the importance of the

PAGE 48

48 of the Third Catilinarian ong 112 which they could now see with their own eyes ( cum oculis 3.4 ). comperta patefacta inlustrata ; 3.3 ). When he d iscovered that Publius Lentulus had talked with the envoys of the Allobroges in an attempt to involve them in the grasp ( manifesto ; 3.5 ). He staged an ambush for the night of December 2 nd sending the praetors Lucius Flaccus and Gaius Pomptinus with a contingent of armed men to intercept the Allobrogian envoys, who were accompanied by Titus Volturcius, at the Mulvian Bridge (3.5). Cicero anticipated that they would have in their possession a letter for Catiline a presupposition that was quickly verified when the ambush was conducted without incident around 3 a.m. the next morning (3.6). Not merely one, but in fact several letters were handed over to the praeto integris signis ). From the moment of their seizure, Cicero handles these letters with utmost delicacy, careful not to invalidate the contents with even the slightest suggestion of their being compromised. To this end, he sha res how the letters were delivered to his home early that morning and, once news of the ambush had spread, many distinguished citizens gathered in his home to see the evidence for themselves; but he refused to open the letters at their urging (3.7). Despi te their concern that he might embarrass himself if the contents prove benign, Cicero expressed confidence in his own intuition, choosing to subject himself to charges of excessive zeal rather than risk disqualifying the evidence by tampering with it. 112 Vasaly (1993) 75 76.

PAGE 49

49 Hav ing at long last a group of culprits in custody after the ambush, Cicero did not delay in revealing the identities of the men whom he suspected of covert involvement in the conspiracy namely, Gabinius, Statilius, Cethegus, and Lentulus (3.6). He summoned these four men and called directly for a meeting of the senate an action he affirms that many in his audience had witnessed ( ut vidistis 3.6 7 ). In the interim, he sent another praetor, Gaius tip from the Allobroges (3.8). Cicero also notes how easily the reported stockpile of deadly weapons, consisting of sicae and gladii Cicero then transports his audience to the senate meet ing where, according to his account, Volturcius was the first to testify (3.8). Under duress, but doubtless encouraged by a guarantee of immunity, Volturcius implicated Lentulus in the conspiracy, claiming that Lentulus had given him instructions and sent him with a letter ( litteras ) for Catiline. Cicero obviously paraphrases his testimony, 113 highlighting certain details against Rome ( servorum praesidio uteretur ), and his plans for fire and slaughter throug hout the city ( ) that correspond to the rumored tales he had portrayed as inevitable fact. Furthermore, these plans had been descriptum n the minds of his listeners the 114 His allusion to this yet undisclosed document outlining the destruction of the city evokes a visual image that lends additional weight to his case. 113 But ler (2002) 95. 114 Ibid.

PAGE 50

50 The envoys of the Allob roges were brought in next for their testimony (3.9). They acknowledged the receipt of three letters addressed to their people, given to them by Lentulus, Cethegus, and Statilius. In addition, they divulged information about the request made by these me n (and Lucius Cassius) that the Allobroges send cavalry forces into Italy as soon as possible, to join with the infantry already there. Lentulus had even attempted to persuade them, they admitted, with prophetic pronouncements concerning the destruction ( interitum ) of the city and empire; these events, he proclaimed, would coincide with his fated rise as the third Cornelius, after Cinna and Sulla. In replaying this imagery, as well as the now clichd references to slaughter and arson in 3.10 ( caedem fieri atque urbem incendi ), where Cethegus is said to have argued with the other conspirators on the timing of their revolt, Cicero reiterates to the audience how great a devastation had threatened the city. After this testimony, Cicero ordered the letters to be brought forth and read aloud to each of the accused in turn (3.10). During the process, Cicero repeatedly underscores the physical evidence against the four men he had indicted. He called for Cethegus first, who identified his seal ( signum ) on the let ter; Cicero then cut the string ( incidimus ) and read the letter ( legimus ) to the senate. In revisiting this critical moment, Cicero uses plural first person verbs to indicate that these actions were collectively done, thereby reaffirming that he had not o pened or read the contents of the letter prior to the senate meeting. The letter, he determined, was written ipsius manu exhibiting certain signa conscientiae : 115 weakness in th e knees ( debilitates ), downcast countenance ( abiectus ), and protracted silence ( conticuit ) all indicators of a guilty conscience. 115 Rhet. Her 2.8: Accusator dicet, si poterit, adversarium, cum ad eum ventum sit, eribuisse, expalluisse, titubasse, inconstanter locutum esse, concidisse, pollicitum esse aliquid; quae signa conscientiae sint Cf. Cic. Inv 1.48 a nd Part. 114.

PAGE 51

51 Cicero shifted his attention next to Statilius (3.10). Again, Cicero presented a letter, soliciting his identification o f its seal ( signum ) and handwriting ( manum suam ). Statilius, he reports, readily acknowledged the marks as his own and, after the letter was read aloud, conceded to authoring it ( confessus est ). Likewise Lentulus, when shown his letter, admitted its seal ( signum ) to be his own; however, once the letter was read aloud (3.11), he struggled against the implication of his guilt. Only when all the evidence had been produced and read out ( toto iam indicio exposito atque edito ), and Lentulus recognized that Vol turcius and the Allobroges conscientiae vis ) finally compel him to confess. Just then, Volturcius demanded that the letter Lentulus gave him for Catiline be brought forth and opened before the m all (3.12). In obvious distress ( vehementissime perturbatus ), Lentulus again acknowledged his seal and handwriting ( signum et manum suam ) when shown the letter, even though he had composed it anonymously ( sine nomine ). The contents therein were brief b ut incriminating, furnishing Cicero with his most damning evidence on record, the conspiratorial word, which he quotes verbatim to the crowd. In that letter, as Butler concludes, arded phrase etiam infimorum 116 117 in so doin g, he provokes fear and leaves the people with a lasting impression of the disasters which they had fortuitously escaped. 116 Butler (2002) 90. 117 Everitt (2003) 107.

PAGE 52

52 Having thus itemized his store of evidence against the conspirators, it seems almost superfluous for Cicero to mention Gabinius and h is confession (3.12). However, with the weight every confession, as this further bolsters his credibility; for none could argue against his claims in t he face of such blatant proofs, and all would agree that his judgment had been correct from the beginning. So, Cicero took great care to display the evidence: he did not open the letters, but rather gave them to the senate with unbroken seals (3.7); he co mmissioned four senators to make a transcript of the senate proceedings, which he distributed over all Italy; 118 and he delivered all the details to the people in his Third Catilinarian demonstrating his conviction (in 3.3) that the conspiracy should be exp 119 unfolded at the senate house; figuratively, it is the last page of his record book. In 3.13, he overviews the evidence, and appends the following epilogue: Ac mihi quidem, Quirites, cum illa certissima visa sunt argumenta atque indicia sceleris, tabellae, signa, manus, denique unius cuiusque confessio tum multo certiora illa, color, oculi, voltus, taciturnitas. Sic enim obst upuerant, sic terram intuebantur, sic furtim non numquam inter sese aspiciebant ut non iam ab aliis indicari sed indicare se ipsi viderentur. Cicero had exhibited sufficient and convincing proofs the testimonies of witnesses, the letters ( tabellae ), seals ( signa ), handwriting ( manus ), and confessions of the conspirators ( unius cuiusque confessio interrogation progressed, it was the demeanor of the accused their pallor ( color ), eyes ( oculi ), expressions ( voltus ), and growing silence ( taciturnitas ) that virtually underlined their 118 Cic. Sul. 41 3. 119 Mitchell (1979) 237.

PAGE 53

53 120 By relaying these visual details of the scene in his speech, Cicero stresses the import of signa conscientiae while offering his listeners a vicarious glimpse of the conspirators, shamefaced and confronted with their crimes. 121 As mediator to the peop le, he 122 Contrary to what some have suggested, there is really no reason to believe that he was purposely falsifying evidence, since many coul d have exposed him if that were the case but none did. 123 conspiracy. 124 Initially city he depicts for them. 125 Cicero was able to procure the documentary evidence requisite for substantiating his allegations. In the much greater influence with the people. In the assessment of Edelman, this effect was easily achieved because: 120 Stockton (1971) 129. 121 Butler (2002) 96. 122 Ibid. 123 Phillips (1976) 448. Seager and Waters 124 Vasa ly (1993) 77. 125 Ibid.

PAGE 54

54 but rather from its reconstructions of the past an d its evocation of unobservables in the present and of potentialities in the future, [thus] language usage is strategic. It is always part of a course of action to enable people to live with themselves and with what they do and to marshall support for cau 126 and the imagined, 127 he appeal to pathos emotional impulse rather than by reasoned judgment 128 Persuading Rome of a conspiracy required concentrated effort and a methodically refined rhetoric; but this persuasion was not accomplished by pathos alone. As Cicero developed his argument against the conspirators based on the destruction they devi sed for the city, he was at the same time promoting his own authority, or ethos 129 As we will see in the next chapter, Cic ero anticipated their need for guidance in the mounting 130 126 Edelman (1988) 108. 127 Vasaly (1993) 78. 128 Cic. De Orat 2. 178: moveatur ut impeto quodam animi et perturbatione magis quam iudicio aut consilio regatur Translation quoted from May and Wisse (2001) 170. 129 Ibid: nihil est enim in d [ qui audiet ] . Translation is from May and Wisse (2001) 170. 130 Butler (2002) 98. Cf. Cic. Catil. 1.2; 2.1; 3.2. Cicero expresses similar thoughts in the poem he later wrote about his consulship, de Consulat u suo 57 65.

PAGE 55

55 CHAPTER 4 THE CONSUL SEES ALL Midway through the Third Catilinarian Cicero evokes the memory of Gaius Marius, a clarissimo viro 3.15 ), whose military accomplishments had garnered custodem huius urbis 3.24 ). Indeed, 131 ity to this icon. This is especially apparent when one considers how extensively he covers his own personal role in exposing the conspiracy: he credits himself with driving Catiline from the city (3.16, 17), preventing widespread destruction (3.15, 17), a pprehending the conspirators (3.5, 6), and eliciting their confessions of guilt (3.10 12). Inevitably, he believed it was his due when the senate decreed a thanksgiving to the gods in his honor. In reporting this news to the people (3.15), Cicero proudl y announces his distinction as the first civilian ( ) since the founding of the city to receive this official honor. In a similar vein, he notes how his thanksgiving would be unique from all others in this regard that it would commemorate the salvation ( conservata ) of the city. Perhaps to lend an air of ceremony to his proclamation, he quotes from the senatorial decree, which designates (and reiterates) the reason for their continued safety: quod urbem incendiis, caede civis, Italiam bell o liberassem person verb liberassem seems suspect in a direct quotation of the liber ator effectively aligning himself 131 Bell (1997) 19.

PAGE 56

56 Cicero had first named Marius, his fellow townsman and a novus homo consul, in his initial speech before the senate. In 1.4, he recalled two previous times in Rome the senate, in passing the senatus consultum ultimum had acted in the best interest of the state by transferring its power to competent, honorable leaders. Marius, he reminded them, had nobly served as one of those leaders. According to Sallust, Marius had a grave sense of the responsibility placed upon his shoulders, and correspondingly, foresaw the effect it would have 132 To se virtus 133 134 conspiratorial scare. However, there was one inherent difference between Cicero and Marius that would make it difficult for him to convince the audience of his own virtus Since Marius was a man of war, his virtus was an inarguable fact, evidenced by his perceptions of and reactions to him. 135 As a novus homo and a civilian, Cicero had to rely on audience feedback to substantiate his cla im to the virtus he so coveted. Consequently, the people 136 132 Sall. Jug 85.5: Et illud intellego, Quirites, omnium ora in me conuersa esse 133 Virtus virtus had no easily articulated essential meaning except that it made Roman men distinctive. It signified the ideal of manliness. And it made men deserving of a 134 presented in Sall. Jug 85. 135 Bell (1997) 19. 136 Ibid.

PAGE 57

57 Cicero therefore endeavored to present himself to his audience in the best possible light. To this end, h e projects the persona of one immensely qualified to lead. He reminds them, first of all (in Catil. 1), of the superiority of his vision, which enabled him to detect early on the subtle workings of the conspiracy. Then (in Catil. 2), he portrays himself as the imperator togatus (in Catil. 3), with the conspiracy exposed and the traitors in custody, he receives the laurels for his efforts, glorying in his nominat ion as savior of the republic. A common theme that emerges in each of these speeches his own authority. In leading his listeners to observe, appreciate, and reward his efforts, he aimed to elevate his status and influence in the public arena. B depictions, let us first consider the importance of ethos the method by which the orator, in advertising his character, increases the persuasive effect of his orator y. The Importance of Ethos In De Oratore 2.115, Cicero outlines three means of persuasion available to the orator: 137 These methods are also referred to respectiv ely as logos ethos and pathos though Cicero avoids using these specific terms. 138 We have already seen numerous examples of pathos in the Catilinarians ; in the last chapter, we analyzed how Cicero employed it in his description of the city ravaged by fir e and sword. Moreover, in chapter 2, we explored how Cicero appealed to pathos in his vivid portrayal of Catiline, his friends, and their depravity, so as to foment the ver; in 137 Ita omnis ratio dicendi tribus ad persuadendum rebus est nixa: ut probemus vera esse, quae defendimus; ut conciliemus eos nobis, qui audiunt; ut animos eorum, ad quemcumque causa postulabit motum, vo cemus 138 The terms derive from Aristotle. See Corbett (1965) 50; May and Wisse (2001) 30, 34.

PAGE 58

58 argument on ethical considerations. 139 This, therefore, may perhaps be regarded as an instance when pathos ethos 140 At first, such an ex ethos in the De Oratore as referred to above. He presents an ethos that esteems the speaker or those for whom he pleads ( commendationem habet nostram aut eorum, quos defendimus 2.114), wi ns the favor of the audience ( ut conciliemus eos nobis, qui audiunt 2.115), and must, by recommending his integrity, support his image as a good man ( probitatis commendatione boni viri debet speciem tueri 2.211). In short, his ethos seems primarily conc erned with the character of the orator. If, however, one considers the fuller explication of ethos that Cicero provides in 2.182 4, it becomes clear that ethos good qualities, while at the same time 141 It is Cicero anticipated that this blending of ethos and pathos would occur in the ideal, finely orche strated speech. In 2.310, he speaks about the proper balance of the three persuasive elements within an oration and the relationship that each should have to the others: una ex tribus his rebus res prae nobis est ferenda, ut nihil aliud nisi docere velle videamur; reliquae duae, sicuti sanguis in corporibus, sic illae in perpetuis orationibus fusae esse debebunt; 139 May and Wisse (2001) 34 n. 42 note the difference between the Greek word ethos ( s in a more restrictive sense to the method of persuasion positive portrayal of ethos as a rhetorical conceit, seems to fit neither the broad scope of the former, nor the narrow designation of the latte r. What the particular nature of his ethos is will be considered presently. 140 Barber (2004) 42. She argues similarly for the collaboration of pathos and ethos in Pro Balbo 141 De Orat eaque omnia, quae proborum, demissorum, non acrium, non pertinacium, non litigiosorum, non acerborum sunt, valde benevolentiam conciliant abalienantque ab eis, in quibus haec non sunt; itaque eademsunt in adversarios ex contrario conferenda Translation adopted from May and Wisse (2 001) 171.

PAGE 59

59 Logos should be displayed openly, appearing only to instruct, he says; pathos and ethos meanwhile, ought to flow throughout the entire sp eech just as blood courses through the body. 142 Additionally, in th eir own ways both ethos and pathos stir the emotions. 143 The types and degrees of emotion elicited vary with either means of persuasion, and are thus dependent upon 2, Cicero characterizes the ethical tone as lenis summissa 144 encourages the audience to feel respect and admiration for the speaker. The pathetical tone, on the other hand, is intenta vehemens rovoking a more energetic, and radical emotional response from the audience. Despite this difference, Cicero concedes that these two kinds of speaking possess a certain similarity that makes distinguishing between them at times very difficult: Nam et ex i lla lenitate, qua conciliamur eis, qui audiunt, ad hanc vim acerrimam, qua eosdem excitamus, influat oportet aliquid, et ex hac vi non numquam animi aliquid inflandum est illi lenitate; neque est ulla temperatior oratio quam illa . (2.212) The well s easoned oration, he believes, embraces an ethos that integrates seamlessly with pathos : it imparts a measure of gentleness to impassioned speech, lends animation to soft words, and imbues the entire discourse with persuasive power. Ideally, the oration sh ould be organic, with each of these elements complementing and enhancing the other, as the need of the moment requires. 142 Schick (1965) 18. 143 In De Orat 2.211, Cicero distinguishes between the rational, argumentative function of logos and collective emotional appeal of ethos and pathos 144 Cf. De Orat 2.182.

PAGE 60

60 While ethos is often intertwined with pathos it differs considerably from pathos in the Pathos e enabling the listener to envision what is being described (a function of enargeia) ; ethos testament to the truth of his message. 145 Ethos therefore, is the most important factor in swaying an audience, since people will believe a descriptive account if they trust the authority or character of the speaker. 146 In fact, Cicero reveals that ethos if handled with taste a nd understanding, has the power to determine an entire case (2.184). character, or ethos to the crowds openly, presenting it as the measure by which they may judge the ver acity of his words. In underscoring his personal virtue, he not only exhibits a marked 147 Maintaining Appearances position toward them greatly influence the overall persuasiveness of his discourse. 148 It follows then that the effective orator must, in facing the people, know to whom he speaks and understand 149 Just as time and place mold the character of an audience, so an orator should adjust his manner of speaking to suit his crowd ( De Orat 2.336 7). 145 Corbett (1965) 319 20. 146 Corbett (1965) 320. 147 May (1988) 51. 148 May (1988) 51. Cf. Cic. De Orat 2.182 4; Arist. Rhet 2.1.1377b. 149 Fantham (2004) 219. Cf. May (2002) 68.

PAGE 61

61 It is likely that amici and clients to he lp manage his public image. 150 The patron client relationship was very important in the gathering and dispensation of information throughout Rome 151 in elections especially, the elite ( amici ) held enough influence over public opinion to determine outcomes. 152 Cicero could therefore rely on his powerful friends and associates to provide him with a supplementary means of image control. Despite this advantage, he still shouldered the primary burden of establishing and maintaining his reputation before the people. For this purpose then he ascended the rostra, to craft his image as the preeminent leader of the day. A Visionary Consul Cicero sought first to recommend the superiority of his vision. Thus, on the 8 th of November he convened the senate in a place tha t provided him with prominent visual aids: the Temple of Jupiter Stator. This setting, staunchly encircled by armed knights whom he had commissioned, 153 allowed Cicero to show the senators what he had already seen for himself: Nihilne te nocturnum praesidi um Palati, nihil urbis vigiliae, nihil timor populi, nihil concursus bonorum omnium, nihil hic munitissimus habendi senatus locus, nihil horum ora voltusque moverunt? (1.1) Cicero recalls the scenery of their situation as he addresses Catiline. The senat ors have seen the armed guards standing night watch on the Palatine (near which they are convened); they have witnessed the fear that has seized the people; and they have just observed the loyal citizens who are assembled outside the temple. 154 Cicero then alludes to the imagery of their immediate 150 Laurence (1994) 66. 151 Laurence (1994) 64ff. 152 Laurence (1994) 67. 153 MacDonald (1977) 18. Cf. Catil. 1.6. 154 concursus bonorum omnium ) consisting of equites and cives is clearly situated outside the temple in 1.21, where Cicero describes the equites as honestissimi and optimi and the cives as fortissimi

PAGE 62

62 surroundings. They can clearly see the well fortified place ( munitissimus locus ) in which they are gathered; furthermore, they cannot overlook the faces and expressions ( ora voltusque ) of the senators who sit within their midst. Cicero builds this crescendo of visual stimuli and peaks with the exclamation, O tempora, o mores (1.2). Although the senate is now alerted to these circumstances, the man responsible for them remains free! But, the senators can look to the vigilance of their leader Cicero, who reminds them, consul videt 155 This introduction is followed by a show of humility as Cicero expresses regret for not acting sooner to quash the conspiracy in its infancy (1.2 4). His sorrow, however, quick ly gives way to zeal as he segues into the argumentatio of his speech. He asks, meministine orable details, all of which center around his early awareness of the conspiracy: did they remember that Cicero had spoken ( me dicere ) about the treachery that was to occur on the 27 th of October? Had he not been right about the plot ( Num me fefelli t ), just as he was right about other reports he had shared ( Dixi ego idem ), and the precautions he took ( mea diligentia republic on more than one occasion (1.7 8)? Cicero had warned Catiline that the aures e t oculi of many would keep watch over his every move (1.6). Now Cicero claims for himself eyes and ears superior to the rest as he declares, nihil agis, nihil moliris, nihil cogitas quod non ego non modo audiam sed etiam videam planeque sentiam (1.8). No 156 a claim which imputes prescience to his 155 1.2: Senatus haec intellegit, consul videt; hic tamen vivit 156 Translation from MacDonald (1977) 41.

PAGE 63

63 vision. Cicero will dedicate much of the remainder of this speech (along with frequent reminders i n his succeeding speeches) to proving the transcendent power of his consular vision. Recognosce mecum 1.8), the orator next entreats his audience, asking, in essence, that they reevaluate what he knows about the conspiracy. 157 Cicero e xpresses confidence that his listeners, in so doing, will appreciate his vigilance ( intelleges me vigilare ) for the safety of the republic destruction. This clear contrast between the orator and his enemy is an established device of ethos allowing Cicero to emphasize the polarity between them. 158 However, as it speaks to and waiting for his next opportunity to st rike. Inevitably, this realization should bring the audience even closer to trusting Cicero who positions himself to be the best match for such a formidable opponent. Through the repeated assurance of his exceptional perception, Cicero secures the audien activities (1.8 response to his censure (1.24 26) a forecast he can easily make b ecause he knows ( sciam sciam sciam 1.24) what preparations Catiline has already set in place. He sees ( video 1.8; Ego video consul 1.9), moreover, men within the audience who were just two nights ago plotting with Catiline. This is an espe cially potent evocation, inviting the listeners to imagine who assembl y (1.16). 157 Here, as elsewhere, Cicero uses the second person singular to address Catiline. Given the context of the speech, however, it is evident that the orator is appealing to his senatorial audience as well 158 See the discussion above concerning ethos Refer also to Cic, De Orat 2.182 4.

PAGE 64

64 Toward the close of the speech, Cicero begs the senate to listen carefully as he shares what the fatherland has to say about the danger. In this hypothetical conversation (1.27), Cicero, speaking as the patria promptly endorses the authority of his perception; it was he who comperisti vides sentis at this point is now a given, but what if communicating his observations puts him at risk for invidiae see ( non videant ) or pretend that they cannot ( quae vident dissimulent ), their disapproval is a probability (1.30). Cicero responds with his conviction, ut invidiam virtute partam gloriam, non invidiam that unpopularity born of virtue is not really unpopularity, but rather, honor (1.29). ethos in the process. patefacta ; inlustrata : 1.32) the conspiracy to them through the power of his vision, Cicero now vows to show it to them ( videatis oppressa ; vindicata ). He leaves his audience with a promise that signals his transition from passive o bserver to active combatant. Though he would continue to disclose his observations and insights when speaking to the people in the Second Catilinarian 159 departure will make it necessary for him to swiftly adopt a more militaristic persona. Imp erator Togatus When Cicero opens his address to the people, he launches directly into invective against quidem unum ducem 2.1 ) of civil war Catiline. May sees his ethos to appear all the more brilliant by contrast when he offers himself to the people as their leader ( Huic ego me bello ducem profiteor 159

PAGE 65

65 2.11 ). 160 allegations; thus, the time had come for all of Rome to join with the consul in preparing for war against this public enemy (2.1). action. He deflects blame, first of 161 He would have removed Catiline long ago, he assures them, and woul d have risked unpopularity ( invidiae 2.3 ) and even his own life if he thought this would have freed them all from danger. But Cicero saw ( viderem 2.4 ) the complications other conspirators. He therefore arranged ( deduxi ) the situation so that the people could see ( videretis ) their enemy clearly and fight him in the open. He grants them, in essence, the means to see what he had long been seeing. Repeatedly, he emphasizes the ( me scire 2.5 Video 2.6 ( patefeci ). He helps the audience visualize the corruption of Catiline and his companions (2.7 10), the t ense senate proceedings of the day before (2.12 13), and the sorts of men debtors, criminals, and the like who sympathize with the conspiracy (2.17 23). Informed by such vivid detail, the people can have no doubt about the seriousness of the conspiracy an d their dire need for a capable, effective leader. 160 May (1988) 52 4. 161 2.3: non est ista mea culpa, Quirites, sed temporum

PAGE 66

66 cohortem ; praetoriam ; praesidia ; exercitus ; and imperatores : 2.24 ) and their conflict ( contendere ; pugnat ; certamine ; proelio : 2.25; defendite 2.26 ). 162 Though he had proffered his leadership early in the speech (2.11), Cicero takes time to construct this war imagery before assuming the role of togato duce et imperatore togatus appearing here for the first time and juxtaposed with the military title dux is significant because the toga is a civilian garment, connoting peace. 163 This is an imag e of striking contrast, which May interprets as follows: By creating the role of a dux or imperator togatus will, Cicero can share in the glory of a kind of military command and victory, but still maintain the per sona of the man of peace who, in favorable contrast to those men of war who resort to violence in order to solve the political problems of Rome, is able to save the state without recourse to arms 164 Although the conspiracy would eventually have to be checked by military power, Cicero presents a favorable contrast to men like Marius, Sulla, and Pompey. 165 Cicero had alluded to Pompey earlier ( unius virtute 2.11 ), crediting him with the foreigners and kings, these looming domestic battles would be fought against less tangible adversaries: luxury, madness, and crime. Cicero promises them in 2.28 that, as their imperator 162 Steel (2001) 168. 163 MacDonald (1977) 96 7 n. b 164 May (1988) 57. 165 Steel (2001) 168.

PAGE 67

67 togatus minimo motu nullo tumulto ), effectual ly suppressing the bellum intestinum ac domesticum post hominum memoriam crudelissimum et maximum Such an accomplishment could be said to rival the bloody victories of Pompey, he suggests la ter in 3.26 and 4.20 22. 166 When Cicero appeared at the consular elections in 63 with armed bodyguards and a breastplate showing beneath his toga, he was prepared, at least outwardly, to defend himself against Catiline. He had been informed that Catiline was intending to assassinate him at the elections, but when he summoned the senate to apprise them of the threat his concerns were disregarded. Not one to be ignored, Cicero devised this spectacle as a way to alert the public and also, incidentally (or no the conspiracy. 167 He appeared then, literally, as the imperator togatus Cicero would recycle this theme in other speeches, 168 but ultimately he hoped to be remembered for his glorious leadership in saving the republic. Savior of the Republic He opens th e Third Catilinarian with joyful proclamation, announcing that the republic, the lives ereptam 3.1 ) and conservatam ) from fire and sword, thanks to his personal sacrif ices. He speaks too 166 Habicht (1990) 39 40. 167 Steel (2001) 168. 168 See Pro Mur 84 and Sul. 85. He also reflects on these events in Off 1.77 and in the poem he wrote commemorating his consulship, Cons. fr. 57 65.

PAGE 68

68 salutis 3.2 conservamur ) and servamur ). Cicero openly presumes that the people will offer thanks to the gods for the man who founded their city, Romulus, 169 but he me ans also to prompt them, with so much servavit ) the city Cicero himself. and confessions of four men intimately involved in the conspiracy (3.3 13). Cicero tells the story from his own authoritative perspective, using many first person verbs to describe his active role in the proceedings: he was watchful ( vigilavi ; providi : 3 .3 ), perceptive ( sentirem ; viderem : 3.4 ), committed ( consumpsi 3.4 ), informed ( comprehenderem ; comperi : 3.4 ), contemplative ( putavi 3.4 ), vocal ( vocavi 3.5 ), revelatory (3.5: exposui ; ostendi : 3.5; ostendi 3.10 ), and collaborative ( consului 3.13 ). Th e senate acknowledged all his labors, he reports (3.14), noting in particular the virtute consilio and providentia sit liberata ) the republic from many dangers. The senate decreed that (3.15). While Cicero takes pleasure in the distinction of being the first civilian ( togato ) to receive such an honor, particularly because it was the also the first time that a thanksgiving h ad been awarded for saving ( conservata ) the republic, he spends relatively little time speaking about review his role in detecting and defeating the conspiracy. He e mphasizes again his remarkable 169 Romulus, as well as Marius (whom I discussed at the beginning of this chapter), represent the archetypes of

PAGE 69

69 foresight ( providebam 3.16 ; provisa 3.18 ; ego providi 3.27 ) 170 and his preemptive action (3.17: occuri ; obstiti : 3.17; a me administrata ; gesta : 3.18; me gessi 3.25 ), which prevented all the horrors of civil war interitu c aede sanguine exercitu dimicatione (3.23); infinitae caedi and flamma (3.27) erepti erepti ) from a most savage and cruel fate, due to the victorious leadership that he provided h e, the uno togato duce et imperatore Yes, he did believe a thanksgiving was in order (3.23), but there was a higher prize that he desired for himself: everlasting remembrance. In 3.26, Cicero begs this one reward from the people: Quibus pro tantis rebus Quirites, nullum ego a vobis praemium virtutis nullum insigne honoris, nullum monumentum laudis postulabo praeterquam huius diei memoriam sempiternam. In animis ego vestris omnis triumphos meos, omnia ornamenta honoris, monumenta gloriae, laudis insig nia condi et conlocari volo He does not want a reward ( praemium ), a special emblem ( insigne ), or a physical memorial set up in his name ( monumentum ); he requests only that they commemorate this day within their hearts for all time. 171 Their remembrance wil l provide all the triumphos ornamenta monumenta and insignia that he could ever want. He hopes, furthermore, that his legacy will be alentur crescent ( inveterascent conroborabuntur ) in the written records. impression that he was arrogant. 172 There were good reasons for an orator to speak well of 170 Providere take appropriate contained in its verbal root. See Morstein Marx (2004) 251 171 ambition. 172 See Allen (1954) for a thorough treatment of this topic. Cf. Quint. Inst 11.1.17 26.

PAGE 70

70 himself, 173 and while Cicero certai nly took many opportunities to do so, Quintilian tells us that self praise does not win an audience. 174 projection of ethos and the influence of his authority. He was not concerned so much with promoting h is oratorical abilities (which Quintilian specifically criticizes), but rather with leadership during a period of insecurity. As time passed and political opinion con cerning edited his speeches to reinforce his authority when he had them published about three years later. 175 y ethos 176 Through the testimony of his sensory perception, Cicero showed the senate and the citizens of Rome the dangers of the conspiracy. As consul, he assumed a spec ial type of leadership, dubbing himself the imperator togatus who would overpower the conspirators with rhetorical guilt before the senate, he was triumphant, be lieving that his efforts had averted the most horrible civil war of all time. Cicero was thoroughly convincing in presenting his personal merits, and while he could not imagine any glory more exalted than his own (3.28), he recognized, nevertheless, that his fame rested on a reputation that could fall out of favor. He therefore needed some means of permanent endorsement to uphold the righteousness of his actions for all 173 Allen (1 954) 128 30 outlines four: (1) to win benevolentia ; (2) in self defense; (3) in a personal narrative given 174 Inst 11.1.15 17 175 Kennedy (1972) 176 7. Cf. Bailey (1971) 32 3; Stockton (1971) 118; Fantham (2004) 132. 176 Bell (1997) 1.

PAGE 71

71 time. We will see in the next chapter how Cicero obtains divine sanction for his acti ons by portraying himself, like Romulus, as the agent of the gods.

PAGE 72

72 CHAPTER 5 DIVINE OVERSIGHT Religion in Speech Making Exclamations invoking the gods, such as O di immortales ( Catil. 1.9) and mehercule (1.17) typically appear in oratory for dramatic effect. Cicero uttered these words in his first speech to the senate and declared similar sentiments when he spoke to them again in his fourth speech ( per deos immortales !, 4.1; di immortales !, 4.15). However, when Cicero appeared before the people in Catil. 2 and 3, he appealed to the gods in a more lengthy manner. He e ntreated them, offered up his thanks, criticized the false religion of his enemies, and convinced salvation a view that even the senate came to share. This effec t suggests that religious persuasive strategy, and should not be overlooked. commonplace to be used in amplificatio 177 They also include the gods among subjects effective for use in the exordium or beginning of a speech, b enevolus attentus docilis 178 Cicero introduces three of his extant speeches in this way, although he more frequently, as Heibges points out, appeals to religious feeling in the peroratio or conclusion, of his speeches. 179 While we cannot fairly deduce C persuade, e.g. the Catilinarians what mattered most was how the audience perceived his beliefs, 177 Rhet. Her 2.48; Inv 1.101. 178 Heibges (1969) 835. Cf. Inv 1.20 3; Cf. Rhet. Her 1.6. 179 rious applications of religion within his speeches.

PAGE 73

73 since this determined the impression his speech made. So whatever his beliefs actually were, he would have known how to use the gods within his speech to influence the audience in his favor. Cicero understood how critical it was for the orator to adapt his methods to his audience. 180 He knew, too, the importance of conveying the emotion he wished to stir up in his audience; so if he desired to stir up religious feeling, he had to first demonstrate it himself. 181 As we will see, he in Catil. 2 and 3 182 though there are some who suspect that the l avish attention he devotes to the gods was really his way of than the senate. 183 In truth, Cicero would not have used religious allusions unless he was certain that 184 This did not necessarily mean, however, that the senate was less inclined to believe in the divine intervention of the gods. Since Cicero employed religious imagery throughout all four of his Catilinarian orations, he must have had a persuasive reason for doing so. In this final chapter, we will examine how Cicero employs visual imagery to convince his e Temple of Jupiter Stator, the Forum, and the Temple of Concord, Cicero exploits the religious connotations of his surroundings to validate his god given authority of leadership, and also attacks the pseudo religion of his enemies to discredit their impio us ambitions. Once he convinces the senate and 180 De Orat 2.336 7; Or 24. 181 De Orat 2.189 96; Or 132. Cf. Grube (1962) 252; Clarke (1996) 78 9. 182 Fantham (1997) 114. 183 MacDonald (1977) 124 n. a Cf. Heibges (1969) 845. 184 Heibges (1969) 848. Cf. Taylor (1949) 78.

PAGE 74

74 emphasize their unity with each other and with the gods when urging the senate to execute the conspirators. I n this way, he procures divine approval for their action overseen, as it was, by the immortal gods. Providentia promotion in the Catilinarians excusing it because he had attribute d his victory either to the virtus of the senate or to the providentia of the immortal gods. 185 Cicero would acknowledge this divine assistance in other speeches as well, most notably in Pro Murena 82 and in Pro Sulla 5. His comments in a letter to Atticus seem to indicate that the faith he professed in divine providence may even have been genuine, though this is not conclusive. 186 Whatever the authenticity of his faith, it is clear that Cicero utilized the gods, and in particular the supreme god Jupiter, to attention on the seriousness of the conspiracy and, moreover, to prove that his role in saving the republic was, in fact, divinely appointed. His Temple Cicero addresses Jupiter directly for the first time while speaking to the sena te inside the of this temple, which, while it is too lengthy to rehearse here, is helpful for understanding the ld have associated with this site. 187 In short, the as the Stator 185 Quint. Inst 11.1.23. 186 Att 1.16.6: Rei publicae statum illum quem tu meo consilio, ego divino confirmatum putabam . 187 Vasaly (1993) 43 6.

PAGE 75

75 188 Cice 2 was designed to center attention right away on the tense atmosphere surrounding the temple immediately jarring. 189 Cicero assures the senate by pointing out the munitissimus locus in which they were gathered, though his observation served the additional purpose of alerting them to the potential danger of their situation. There were other places that would have been more with the reality of security but with the perception 190 Therefore, the history and associations of the temple, as well as the armed equites Cicero had stationed around it, made it the best location to serve this symbolic purpose. first outcry to the gods, O di immortales traitorous activities and his stunned observation ( Video sanctissimo ) senate proceedings (1.9). That these custodi ) of their city, who had many times in the past ensured their escape tam horribilem tamque infestam pestem conspiracy with this same term, pestem 191 his oblique reference here speaks enough to the 188 Ibid. 189 Ibid. 50. 190 Ibid. 59. Italics sic 191 As discussed in chapter 2 of this study. See 1.30 1.

PAGE 76

76 desecration their very presence implies, especially since they were openly seeking to destroy the templa deorum immortalium 1.12 ). mehercule within their assembly an isolation which further mirrors the inappropriateness of his presence there (1.17). Cicero again reminds the senators of their temple locale (1.21: hoc ipso in templo ), again he directs their minds to the fortification enveloping it ( illi equites Romani ceter ique fortissimi cives videre perspicere exaudire potuisti ), and then he cries out with yet another exclamation ( Utinam tibi istam mentem di immortales duint !, 1.22). While he trusts in the security of these visible safeguards, he laments their ineffectiveness in deterring Catiline who he wishes albeit vainly would follow the prompting of the gods to leave the city in peace. Cicero speaks again of Jupiter in the climactic ending of his speech (1.33), only this time he tells not of what th e god had done for the city, but rather what he will do. Cicero makes a direct appeal to Tu, Iuppiter 192 Vasaly discusses the syntax here at length, interpreting t he allusion to Romulus and the auspices thus: that just as Romulus had received divine sanction for Stator of the city for all time. 193 She notes further: in th is place, closely connected both with the founding of the city by Romulus and his as political, moral, and spiritual leader of Rome in its hour of crisis. 194 192 1.33: Tu, Iuppiter, qui isdem quidbus haec urbs auspiciis a Romulo es constitutus . Translation from Vasaly (1993) 55. 193 Vasaly (1993) 55 6. 194 Ibid. 59.

PAGE 77

77 Cicero was, in fact, petitioning Jupiter from the very same spot where Romulus had Romulus who had come to rescue the city in its distress. 195 more dramatic since, in addressing Jupiter, he likely gestured to the statue of the god which h they were assembled. 196 Cicero forecasts that Catiline, impium bellum ), will only bring upon himself the pestis that he thinks to inflict on the republic (1.33) He then closes with a warning to Catiline and all who had partn ered with him in his conspiracy. Though they may sit his temple now, Jupiter the Stator of Rome will keep them far away from it and from all other temples ( a tuis certerisque templis ) in the future of that, Cicero is certain. He closes with an expectant irreverence with eternal punishment. His Statue 197 He accomplish ed this by focusing on the symbolic significance of his location, though his allusions would not have been quite so spectacular without the imposing image of Jupiter that stood as a statue within the temple. Understanding the power of the visual, Cicero w enhance the illustrative energy of his speeches to the people. 198 The most impressive of these 195 Vasaly (1993) 53. 196 Ibid. 50 1. 197 Aldrette (1999) 25. 198 Ibid.

PAGE 78

78 aids was also a statue of Jupiter, which just so happened (presumably) to be re er ected on the day Third Catilinarian consider how he prepared his audience for the illusion of divine intervention in the matter of the conspiracy. In his Second Catilinarian Cicero refers to the gods several times when he apprises the people, as he had the senate, of the danger of the conspiracy. He describes the scene of the aedem 2.12) of Jupiter Stator in which Catiline, perditum civem ) importunissimum hostem ) had appeared and was appropriately rebuffed by all those in attendance. In the interval since that meeting, Catiline had left the city, thereb them that they would in three days hear report the that Catiline had assumed leadership of an exe rcitum hostium 2.15 ). Though his news is distressing, Cicero declares that he will never desire the immortal gods ( dis immortalibus ) to ease the burden of unpopularity ( invidiae ) that he must endure for sharing this unpleasant report with the people. speech. In 2.19, after affirming his own loyalty to Rome and reminding the crowd of the many devoted men and soldiers that support the republic, he expresses his convict ion that the deos immortalis tantam vim sceleris praesentis ). In 2.25, he describes the scene of the impending tot et tanta vitia praeclarissimis virtutibus 199 In this 199 These more poe tic translations are from MacDonald (1977) 95.

PAGE 79

79 conflict, Cicero asserts, the di ipsi immortales that good t riumphs over evil. Finally, in 2.29, Cicero testifies to the oversight of the gods, whose omens ( significationibus ) continue to guide his leadership. The gods will, he believes, defend their temples ( sua templa ) in person by their divine will and might ( suo numine atque auxilio ); nevertheless, he encourages the people to pray, worship, and beseech ( precari, venerari, implorare ) the gods for their continued protection. At the conclusion of this speech, the people would have had the distinct impression, b ultimately secure the republic from harm. Cicero was then considerably advantaged when the arrest and indictment men appeared to demonstrate the truth of his assertions. It only made sense for Cicero, therefore, in announcing his special role in saving the republic, also to pay homage to the gods and in particular, to Jupiter for their prese Third Catilinarian is, 200 201 In order to put all of this religious language into perspective, it is helpful to visualize the location where Cicero delivered this third speech: The audience facing the Rostra would have seen the speaker, then, flanked by statues and monuments and against the backdrop of the enlarged Curia of Sulla. To the east stood Capitoline Hill: the Capitolium, which included the sacred precinct of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, and the Arx, the mo st prominent building of which was the Temple of Juno Moneta. 202 200 Millar (1998) 109. 201 Kennedy (1972) 180. 202 Vasaly (1993) 68.

PAGE 80

80 Surrounding the orator were buildings and monuments that conveyed a multitude of associations, simultaneously political, historical, and religious. 203 anci 204 Even the Rostra from which Cicero spoke, which elevated him above the crowd, would have added its own symbolic meaning to the panorama. 205 to the gods would undoubtedly have maximum impact. summo amore 3.1 ) of the immortal gods for the people. He attributes this success to his ow n efforts as well: it was through his labors, deliberations, and personal risks ( laboribus, consiliis, periculis meis ereptam ( conservatam ) from destruction. As Cicero describes the peril that the people had avoided, one can easily envision them looking around at their surroundings and imaging how the Forum might have appeared if the conspiracy had succeeded. Furthermore, in claiming responsibility for temples; delubris 3. 2 ) as well as the rest of the city from the 206 The day n is just as important as the day of its founding, he reasons; therefore, as they 203 Vasaly (1993) 69. See pp. 60 75 for a detailed analysis of these structures and their various connotations for 204 Vasaly (199 3) 61. 205 Morstein throughout this study. 206 Habicht (1990) 33. Cf. Morstein Marx (2004) 252.

PAGE 81

81 207 Cicero has now been given the opportunity ab dis immortalibus he immortal and one for which he had long waited ( manifesto ) discerned to the senate and the people. He proceeds then, in 3.5 15, to relate the circumstances resulting in the arrest of several conspirators a nd their subsequent prosecution in the senate. He mentions, of course, the honor of a supplicatio had decreed to the immortal gods ( dis immortalibus ) in his behalf, which, one can safely assume, he intended as further j depravity in 3.16 17, Cicero launches into an extended review (3.18 involvement and his own guidance had guaranteed the preservation of Rome. He readily attribu tes his deeds and foresight (3.18: et gesta et provisa ) to divine direction; nutu atque consilio praes entes ) to opem et auxilium ) to them, he suggests that the deities could almost be seen there in the Forum, before their very eyes (. ut eos paene oculis videre possimus ). Following this intimation, Cicero begins to survey the many portents, or observable the most conspicuous of which was the inauguration that 208 he regards this statue not 207 Vasaly (1993) 80. 208 Konstan (1993) 18.

PAGE 82

82 209 Literally then, it seems that the people could behold Jupiter there oculis 3.18 ). 210 illud signum quod videtis : and explains how its particular orientation was in keeping with the recommendation of the soothsayers ( haruspices 3.19 ), who believed that by facing it eastward toward the rising sun, the Forum, and the Sen ate house the secret plots of the conspirators would be illuminated ( inlustrarentur ), and therefore visible ( ut perspici possunt ) to all. Having just revealed the truth of the conspiracy to them (in 3.5 15), as Jupiter had revealed it to him, Cicero (3.21), since they had witnessed this omen for themselves, how any of them could disbelieve that nutu ac potestate ), sustaining R ome when there were so many evidences ( haec omnia quae videmus ) that indicated divine involvement. He laments tam adversus a vero ). Cicero plays on the theme of the visual here by presenting a contrast betwe en Jupiter who, by seeing, illumines truth and those who, by refusing to see, deny it. The consul hoped that, just as the god had enhanced his own vision, he could help the audience to see and perceive what they could not, thereby revealing the truth that had been hidden from their view. 211 erection early that morning, while the conspirators were led through the Forum to the senate meeting, signified the direct intervention of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, whose temple was in the vicinity. What could be 209 Aldrette (1999) 26. 210 statue of the god Apollo erected o n the Capitolium. Pliny mentions these statues in HN 34.39 40. See also Vasaly (1993) 68 9 n. 57. 211 Morstein Marx (2004) 252.

PAGE 83

83 indeed see ( vidistis inlustrata et patefacta ), just as the soothsayers had predicted? Most scholars now suspect that Cicero had, 212 Admittedly, there does seem to have been an element of th events, as Butler argues: Cicero acted out his command performance, with all Rome as his stage. First the morning crowd in the Forum was startled to see the consul Cicero leading the praetor Lentulus down from the Palatine t o the temple of Concord, holding him by the wrist in a well superior imperium as consul.) They were followed by several other men under armed guard. At that very moment, a statue of Jupiter was being hoisted into place on the Capitoline, his face turned toward the Forum below. [and] hundreds of hurriedly summoned senators were filing into the temple. 213 214 it is clearly rhetorical opportunities of his locale. 215 the greatest and most powerful of whom was looking down upon their assembly, Cicero was able ille, ille, Iuppiter 3.22 ( deorum templuis atque delubris ) desecrated by the enemy. For this reason, the gods guided 212 Butler (2002) 97. divine i nvolvement, he would later (in the De Divinatione ) ascribe it to Aldrette (1999) 25 6; Heibges (196 9) 844. 213 Butler (2002) 86. 214 Ibid. 215 Fantham (1997) 114. Cf. Aldrette (1999) 26.

PAGE 84

84 Cicero ( Dis ego immortalibus ducibus hanc mentem voluntatemque suscepi plan togati me uno togato duce et imperatore vicistis ro stands there speaking atop the Rostra, he becomes the intermediary both physically and figuratively between the people and their gods. 216 Other Portents There were additional visible signs from the gods, besides the coincidental appearance of statue, which Cicero mentions in the Catilinarians Some of these signs he connects with the conspiracy, interpreting them as early warnings from the gods that trouble would befall the city. Others of these signs he associates with the bogus religion of his enemies who had hoped to use the illusion of divine help to further their irreligious enterprise. As Cicero reviews these portents with his audience, he discloses their meaning with this symbolic message: that the gods offer protection to those who a re reverent, but punish those who are irreverent. In 3.18 20, Cicero recalls several portents that, he claims, foretold of an imminent threat nocturno tempore ab occidente faces 3.18 ) and ardore [ m ] caeli ) apparitions which can probably be attributed to astronomical phenomena, such as a meteor shower (a rare occurance in central fulminum iactus ), a sign that woul d have, by earthquakes ( terrae motus that occurred during the time of his consulship. In t he guise of omitting or passing over all of 216 Taylor (1949) 87.

PAGE 85

85 these signs ( Nam ut illa omittam relinquam, ut omittam cetera ), he effectively draws attention to them so that the audience can connect these occurances with an event he is about to neque praetermittendum neque reliquendum est ). During the consulship of Cotta and Torquatus in 65 B.C., Cicero reminds them, a lightning storm damaged many objects on the Capitoline (3.19). Images of the gods ( simulacra deor um ), statues of forefathers ( statuae veterum hominum ), and bronze tablets of the law ( legum aera depulsa deiectae and liquefacta ). In every instance, sacred and symbolic items including a s tatue of Romulus, the revered founder of Rome suffered violence. When the soothsayers from Etruria gathered together to interpret these signs, they prophesied that caedis atque incendia et legum interitum et bellum civile ac domesticum et totius urb is atque imperi occasum appropinquare dixerunt, nisi di immortales omni ratione placati suo numine prope fata ipsa flexissent (3.19) placati ) by every method to redire prope fata ipsa ) by their divine power. Cicero points out that that everything was done to satisfy the gods (3.20); games were held for ten days and a larger statue of Jupiter was commissioned for replacement overlooking the Forum. These efforts culminated in the spectacle that greeted the audience that morning the raising up of simulacum suggesting that the gods had indeed been placated and had used their inf luence to save the Republic from an ominous fate.

PAGE 86

86 217 Vasaly elaborates: Just as lightning had struck t he capital, destructive plans that would strike at the heart of the city were being formed; as the Capitolium had been ravaged by fire, so the plans would include an attack by fire on Rome; and as the physical monument of the Laws had been destroyed, in th e future the conceptual laws would be overturned. 218 The desecration of these symbols represented the future destruction of all that was sacred to Rome and her citizens. For this reason the soothsayers recommended that the people demonstrate their reverenc e for the sacred gods who had the power to circumvent fate. Cicero, therefore, encouraged the people to pray (2.29, 3.29), 219 and offered up prayers himself (1.15, 220 The enemies of R ome also claimed to have received portents from the gods. In 3.9, 221 Lentulus told them that his rise had been foretold by the Sibylline book s and the soothsayers ( ex fatis Sibyllinis haruspicumque responsis ), and that there were other signs that this was the year fated ( fatalem years since the acquittal of the Vestal Virgins, and twenty years since the burning of the Capital which also supported his claim to power. When later confronted with his assertions in 217 Vasaly (1993) 82. 218 Ibid. 219 consent [of] Altheim (1938) 422. 220 Cicero also stresses the necessity of offering up a prayer of thankgiving ( supplicatio salvation in 3.15 a nd 23. Curiously, he omits the gods when mentioning this thanksgiving in his fourth speech (4.5, 10, 20), which he delivered to the senate who decreed the thanksgiving to the gods in the first place! 221 arian leader and consul from 87 was L. Cornelius Sulla, the dictator. MacDonald (1977) 108 n. b

PAGE 87

87 the senate, and asked specifically about the Sibylline books, Lentulus suddenly confessed his guilt (3.11). Like Lentulus, Catiline an d the other conspirators had also deceived themselves with the trappings of a false religion. When Cicero spoke to Catiline in the senate on November 8 th he (1. 24; Cf. 2.13 4). In preparation for his departure, Catiline had apparently sent some men ahead with military weapons and accoutrements, but Cicero noted one item in particular that seemed most incongruous as insignia for his enemy army: the silver eagle ( aquilam argenteam ). This standard had been implemented in the legionary insignia by Marius years before, so it possessed a certain historical appeal. 222 Jupiter also was associated with this symbol, as the eagle was his sacred bird. Cicero, however, this bird for his benefit. Though he had set up a shrine at his home for worshiping ( venerari ) this sacrarium scelerum ) 223 for impiam dexteram ) could readily go from altar ( altaribus ) to slaughter ( necem ). 224 The gods did not recognize his worship (nor that of his followers) because his sacrilegious actions rendered it vain. 225 Cicero repeatedly emphasize ( templa 1.12, 33; 2.29; 3.2, 22; 4.2), the sacred shrines ( delubra 3.2, 22; 4.2) and even the 222 MacDonald (1977) 56 n. b 223 sacrarium stands in stark contrast to the legitimate delubrum of the gods. Though both o f these terms Catilinarians 224 Cicero presents a similar contrast between the sacred and the profane in 1.16. Since Catiline had attempted to kill qui bus sacris initiata ) and devota ) in order to (justifiably) thrust it into a consul. 225 i n the conspiracy. See Barlow ( 1994) for an interesting article that explores this subject.

PAGE 88

88 Vestal Virgins (4.13), who devote their lives to the service of the gods. These vile men are criminals (1.33, 2.19), traitors (1.33, 2.29), and collectively, a pestis deadly to the republic ( 1 .11, (literally and metaphorically) that sustains them. their worship and impious ambition for the destruction of their sacred places. The se men would receive from the gods, therefore, the due penalty of their error. Because of their irreverence, they would bring pestem upon themselves (1.2, 33); aeternis suppliciis 1.33); suffer punishment ( poena 2.11, 3.15, 4.6; vindicandum 4.6; supplicium 1.33, 3.22, 4.7), pernicies 1.33), fatum odium : 3.22); and eventually, for many of them, meet death ( damnati 4.5; mors 4.7; mortis poenam 4.7). In the end, the gods actively t hwarted the conspirators (3.22) and redirected the fatum that these men had planned for the republic (3.1) back onto themselves. And so Cicero could confidently assert that it was he and not Lentulus who had been truly destined ( fatalem ) to interpret the signs of the gods, since he had, by his reverence, procured their divine favor (4.2). The Temple of Concord Cicero delivers his fourth and final Catilinarian to the senate assembled in the Temple of Concord. The setting of this speech was, as with the o ther orations, explicitly suited to the you will) 226 in a course of action against the conspirators. Cicero believed that the senate held 226 Concordia ordinum

PAGE 89

89 the absolute autho 227 The problem he encountered, however, was that [a] formal sentence by the Senate, which was not a court of law, lacked precedent and ight of appeal to the People against a death penalty the Senate might vote for the execution of the five plotters, but as prime mover and executive Cicero would become the target for reprisals. 228 As consul, Cicero had good reason to be concerned abou decision. Consequently, in the Fourth Catilinarian who feared that the physical force needed to carry through the executions was lacking, the sense of the whole area b 229 In emphasizing this prevailing atmosphere of unanimity, Cicero could minimize the public perception of his personal 230 Video twice in 4.1 ). In the last of a series of speeches that have relied extensively upon the concept of the visual, this word provides a fitting segue to the audience, he sees his gaze returned by their eyes ( conversos oculis ). He also observes ( video ) their anxiety about the danger to themselves, the republic, and to him as their consul. He th en evokes their remembrance of several locations in the city including the Forum, the Campus Martius, and the Senate house and notes the symbolic meaning that they would have attached to each (4.2). In focusing their attention right away on the visual (i. e. on what can either be seen 227 Mitchell (1971) 52 3. 228 Bailey (1971) 33. 229 Millar (1998) 110 11. See Catil. 4.14. 230

PAGE 90

90 or easily imagined), Cicero alludes back to the authority of his consular vision, which had enabled him to detect and suppress a conspiracy that had threatened the security of their public places and was responsible for their existing concern. He desires them to trust his vision still, so he strives to alleviate their worry by helping them see what it is that he sees a room full of people who are united in a common purpose, and are collectively empowered to make a decision for the good of the republic. Cicero acknowledges the potential for discord in the assembly, stemming from a disagreement between Silanus and Caesar regarding the best punishment for the conspirators (4.7 8). Though Cicero sided in opinion with Silanus, wh o favored execution, he had to be very careful not to appear to lead the senate to this decision. The dilemma of his situation was that he 231 The record of his speech, therefore, shows his efforts to demonstrate the solidarity of the senate, who needed assurance that the consul would uphold whatever decision they made as a unified body (4.14). Cicero embarks on this theme of unity beginning in 4.14, where he as sesses, once again, Omnes ) is present omnium ordinum omnium generum omnium aetatum ). Despite their inherent differences, these men can be se en crowding the Forum, the temples around the Forum, and the spaces surrounding the temples, filling them to capacity ( plenum plena pleni ). In this massive gathering of people, Cicero perceives something remarkable, something that the city ha d not experienced since its founding: unanimity ( omnes sentirent unum ). 231 (274).

PAGE 91

91 There were some who were incapable of relating to this common bond among the populace and who, because of their crimes against the state, proved that they were actually quite hostile to the concept of unity. Cicero, in removing ( excipio ) and separating ( secerno ) these men the conspirators from society, had only made their moral and social isolation visibly official (4.15). But here, Cicero makes a very important distinction concernin g their identity: the conspirators are not to be classed as wicked citizens, he advises the senate; they are to be viewed, rather, as most despicable enemies. 232 He echoes a similar sentiment in 4.16 when he contrasts the freedman who greatly prizes his cit izenship or the slave who would eagerly possess it with the aristocrat who disdains it because he see his countrymen as enemies. But Cicero does not consider these men for long. He calls upon the gods ( di immortales !, 4.15), as he had the senate, to ob qua frequentia, quo studio, qua virtute consentiunt ) to promote the security and worth of all ( communem ). Cicero represents these loyal and supportive people as the very heart of Rome, including among them: knights (4.15, 22), tribunes (4.15), clerks (4.15), freeborn citizens (4.16), the poor (4.16), freedmen, (4.16), slaves (4.16), and tradesmen (4.17); in short, all classes (4.18, 19), all Roman people (4.19), and all loyal c itizens (4.22), he says, video video 4.15 ) all these people ( aspectus 4.16 ) of the city, which could be seen outside in the area of the Forum. The city, he reminds them, and all that composes it temples, freedoms, daylight, soil is the common ( commune ) possession of them all, and is yet another example of their shared interests. 232 If Cicero distinction would help to justify their execution. Cf. Habicht (1990) 37.

PAGE 92

92 Similar language emphasi of the rest of the speech. 233 All the people were joined together ( coniungit 4.15 ) in a societatem concordia [ m coniunctionem ). All classes were of the same m ind ( consentiunt 4.18 patria communis omnis omnis universum 4.19 ) were truly united in a common mindset ( unum atque idem sentientem break or confringere et labefactare 4.22 ) this bond ( coniunctionem ) between the senate, the Equites, and all loyal citizens ( bonorum omnium ). In closing (4.24), Cicero impresses upon their minds the images of all they cherish and have in common their family ties ( coniungibus as liberis ), the sacred places ( aris ; focis ; fanis ; templis ), the public and private places ( urbis tectis ac sedibus ), and their values ( imperio ; libertate ; salute and universa re publica te decides how to punish the men who put all their interests at risk, Cicero reaffirms his loyalty to them and vows always to defend their cooperative decision on the eech was intended to concordia ordinum in support of the 234 235 since it enabled Cicero to paint an idealized picture of the masses rallying around t he senate in a place where this was easily conceivable. Indeed, the people were out in hordes that day and some were highly interested in the senate proceedings, but Cicero did not need to embellish this scene. In the end, he knew that 233 Mitchell (1979) 238. 234 Eagle (1949) 15; Butler (2002) 99. 235 Ibid.

PAGE 93

93 236 236 Edelman (1988) 113.

PAGE 94

94 CHAPTER 6 CONSTRUCTION OF A PO Catilinarian orations showcase, to great effect, a descriptive technique that has traditionally been relegated to the poet: imagery. While Cicero did write his share of poetry, he displayed his lin guistic finesse most remarkably in the genre of oratory, where he excelled in the art of persuasion. With devices and methods that lent themselves to the visual, such as metaphor and enargeia a picture of reality that favored his political advancement, and detracted, correspondingly, from the image of his enemies. Cicero employs imagery in all four of his speeches, vividly animating his depiction of characters and events. He exhibits to his audience, first of all, the depraved character of Catiline who, with his friends, engages in activities so immoral and vile that the orator likens his influence to a pestis or cancerous disease. Cicero then focuses on the symptoms and casualties of this disease, displaying an apocalyptic vision of the republic that jars shockingly with the grandeur that the people could see around them in the Forum. In order to prevent the ruin of fire and slaughter from destroying the city, Cicero projects an image of himself that recommends his authority as a consul, visionary, and imperator togatus suggesting that he alone is capable of saving the republic from harm. And indeed, when he does succeed in capturing the conspirators, he seems prideful at first as he ann he is quick to attribute the ultimate preservation of the city to the immortal gods, and in particular, to Jupiter, who presided over the Forum on the day that the conspiracy was revealed and ad opted the consul as his proxy. In these ways, Cicero employs visual imagery, evokes to construct an image of reality that was most useful to his purpose.

PAGE 95

95 Most disputed his claim of preserving the state from harm. 237 Twenty years after the crisis of the conspiracy, Cicero reflected thus: For never was the republic in more serious peril, never was peace more profound. Thus, as a result of my counsels and my vigilance, their weapons slipped suddenly from the hands of the most desperate traitors dro pped to the ground of their own accord! What achievement in war, then, was ever so great? What triumph can be compared with that? 238 suppressing it remained fres h in his mind. From the moment his account, in four illustrative speeches, was recorded in writing, the Catilinarian conspiracy assumed a place within the annals portrayal of the events as they unfolded, his speeches reveal to us, in their vivid construction of 237 Mitchell (1979) 239 40. Cf. Wood (1988) 50 1. 238 Off 1.77. Translation from Wood (1 988) 51.

PAGE 96

96 LIST OF REFERENCES Aldrette, G.S. 1999. Gestures and Acclamations in Ancient Rome Baltimore. TAPhA 85:121 44. Altheim, F. 1938. A History of Roman Religion London. Bailey, D.R.S. 1971. Cicero New York. Barber, K.A. 2004. Rhetoric in New York. Barlow, J. 1994. "Cicero's Sacrilege in 63 B.C." Studies in Latin Literature 7 : 180 89. Bartlett, J. 1992. 16 th ed. Edited by J. Kaplan. Boston. oman Blush: The Delicate Matter of Self Constructions of the Classical Body pp. 212 34. Ann Arbor. Bell, A.J.E. 1997. "Cicero and the Spectacle of Power." JRS 87: 1 22. Bible. 1971. King James Version. Nashville. Bradl CPh 73.4: 329 36. Butler, S. 2002. The Hand of Cicero London. Cape Jr., R.W. 1995. "The Rhetoric of Politics in Cicero's Fourth Catilinarian AJPh 116.2: 255 77. Clark, A.C., ed. 1989. M. Tulli Cice ronis Orationes: Pro Sex. Roscio, De Imperio Cn. Pompei, Pro Cluentio, In Catilinam, Pro Murena, Pro Caelio Oxford. Clarke, M.L. 1996. Rhetoric at Rome: A Historical Survey London. Craig, C.P. 1993. "Three Simple Questions for Teaching Cicero's First Cat ilinarian ." CJ 88.3: 255 67. Crawford, J.W. 1994. M. Tullius Cicero The Fragmentary Speeches: An Edition with Commentary 2 nd ed. Atlanta. Corbett, E.P.J. 1965. Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student New York. Dudley, D.R. 1960. The Civilization of Rom e New York. Concordia Ordinum Phoenix 3.1: 15 30. Edelman, M. 1988. Constructing the Political Spectacle Chicago.

PAGE 97

97 Edwards, C. 1993. The Politics of Immorality in Ancient Rome Cambridge. Ewbank, W.W. 1933. The Poems of Cicero London. Everitt, A. 2003. New York. Fantham, E. Roman Eloquence: Rhetoric in Society and Literature edited by W.J. Dom inik. London. 2004. De Oratore Oxford. Gould, H.E. and J.L. Whiteley, eds. 1982. Cicero: In Catilinam I & II Bristol. Griffin, M.T. and E.M. Atkins, trans. 1991. Cicero: On Duties Cambridge. Phoenix 16.4: 234 57. Gruen, E.S 1974. The Last Generation of the Roman Republic Berkeley. CPh 64:1: 20 24. Habicht, C. 1990. Cicero the Politicia n Baltimore. Hadas, M. 1952. A History of Latin Literature New York. Oxford. TAPhA 86: 135 42. Heibge s, U. 1969. "Religion and Rhetoric in Cicero's Speeches." Latomus 28: 833 49. Rhetorica 6.3: 307 25. Kennedy, G.A. 1972. The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World, 300 B.C. A.D. 300. Princeton. Catilinarian Orations Rethinking the History of Rhetoric: Multidisciplinary Essays on the Rhetorical Tradition edited by T. Poulakos pp. 11 30. Boulder. Lanham, R.A. 1991. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms, 2 nd ed. Berkeley. G&R 41.1: 62 74. Leeman, A.D. 1986. Orationis Ratio: The Stylistic Theories and Practice of the Roman Orators Historians and Philosophers vol. 1. Amsterdam.

PAGE 98

98 Maccari, C. Wikipedia 16 Jan. 2007. . MacDonald, C., tran. 1977. Cicero: In Catilinam I IV, Pro Murena, Pro Sulla, Pro Flacco Cambridge. MacKendrick, P. 1995. The Spe eches of Cicero: Context, Law, Rhetoric London. Maclardy, A.A. 2004. Completely Parsed Cicero: The First Oration of Cicero Against Catiline Wauconda, IL. Rh etoric edited by, J. M. May pp. 49 70. Boston. 1988. Trials of Character: The Eloquence of Ciceronian Ethos Chapel Hill. May, J.M and J. Wisse, trans. 2001. Cicero: On the Ideal Orator (De Oratore). Oxford. Philologus 116.2: 277 84. "metaphor, n ." OED Online Dec. 2001. Oxford University Press. 12 July 2007 . Millar, F. 1998. The Crowd in Rome in the Late Republic A nn Arbor. Senatus Consultum Ultimum Historia 20: 47 61. 1979. Cicero: The Ascending Years New Haven. Morstein Marx, R. 2004. Mass Oratory and Political Power in the Late Roman Republic Cambridge. Mueller, H. F Teoria E Prassi Politica Nelle Opere Di Plutarco (Atti del V Convegno plutarcheo, Certosa di Pontignano, 7 9 guigno 1993), edited by I. Gallo and B. Scadigli, pp. 287 300. Napoli. N Cicero edited by T.A, Dorey, pp 47 79. New York. Croatia and Bosnia Medical Anthropology Quarterly 12.1: 31 50. Oxford Latin Dictionary 1982. Edited by P.G.W. Glare. Oxford. Women and Slaves in Greco Roman Culture: Differential Equations edited by J. Murnagham, S.R. Murnagham, and S. Murnaghan, pp. 152 73. New Y ork.

PAGE 99

99 Historia 25: 441 48. Potter, D. S. 1999. Literary Texts and the Roman Historian London. Price, J.J. 1998. "The Failure of Cicero's First Catilinarian .'" Studies in Latin Literature 10 : 106 28. Ramsey, J pro Sulla HSPh 86: 121 31. JRS 62: 33 45. Robinson, A. 1994. "Avoiding the Responsibility: Cicero and the Suppression of Cati line's Conspiracy." SyllClass 5: 43 51. Rosnow, R.L. and G.A. Fine. 1976. Rumor and Gossip: The Social Psychology of Hearsay New York. The Classical Bulletin 42.2: 17 18. Scullard, H.H. 1965a. Fro m the Gracchi to Nero London. Novus Homo Cicero edited by T.A. Dorey, pp 1 25. New York. Historia 13: 338 47. Iusta Catilinae Historia 22.2: 240 48. Shakespeare, W. 1998. The Tragedy of Hamlet Prince of Denmark Edited by S. Barnet. New York. Kleine Schriften 2: 216 30. Steel, C.E.W. 2001. Cicero, Rhetoric, and Empire Oxford. 2005. Reading Cicero: Genre and Performance in Late Republican Rome London. Stockton, D. 1971. Cicero: A Political Biography Oxford. Taylor, L.R. 1949. Party Politics in the Age of Caesar Berkeley. Vasaly, A. 1993. Representations: Images of the World in Ciceronian Oratory Berkeley. Waters, K.H. 1970. "Cicero, Sallust, and Catilina." Historia 19: 195 215.

PAGE 100

100 The Passions in Roman Thought and Litera ture edited by S.M. Braund and C. Gill pp. 112 27. Cambridge. Wilkins, A.S., ed. 1989. M. Tulli Ciceronis Rhetorica, Tomus I: Libros De Oratore Tres Oxford. Wood, N. 1988. Berkeley. William Wordsworth: Selected Poems Edited by S. Gill. London. Historia 12: 485 99. Yavetz, Z. 1988. Slaves and Slavery in Ancient Rome New Brunswick. Yeats, W.B. 2002. W. B. Yeats: Selected Poems Edited by J. Kelly. London.

PAGE 101

101 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Angela Brook Miller Reed was born on May 8 th 1980 in Montgomery, Alabama. The oldest of four children, she grew up mostly in Ocala, Florida, graduating from Forest High School in 1998. She earned her A.A. from Florida College in Templ e Terrace before transferring to the University of Florida where in 2002 she received her B.A. in classical studies, with minors in English and secondary education. She began work on her M.A. in Latin that fall, but after a year of full time graduate stud y, left Gainesville to marry David Reed, a UF alumnus. Angela and her husband returned to Gainesville the following year so she could continue her graduate coursework. Between remodeling a fixer upper and working full time as a teacher at Union County Hi gh School in Lake Butler, she finally managed to complete her degree requirements, receiving her M.A in Latin in August 2007. Angela will continue teaching in the Gainesville area in the fall, when she begin a new position at Cornerstone Academy, instruct ing middle and upper level Latin students.