650. Pro Murena. Loeb. Cicero. Cicero is worth reading even when you feel a subject is not worthy of a look see. He consistently uses rhythm, sounds, patterns of words and images to develop thought which lead to powerful ideas. All this depends upon a deep knowledge of history, politics, poetry, art, painting, emotions and manner in which human mind works and philosophy. Cicero defended Murena who had been elected Consul in the Summer of 63. That fall the Catilinarian Conspiracy accelerated into open rebellion against the Republic. So in the midst of dealing with a conspiracy which involved delicate maneuvering in Senate meetings, since several sitting Senators were involved, Cicero was forced to contend with two fellow politicians, who were friends, prosecuting the consul designate Murena for election bribery. Those two politicians were Marcus Porcius Cato and Servius Sulpicius Rufus. Cato carried his own weight in that he was forceful and known to be honest and Sulpicius was a famous jurist. November 8 Catiline had left Rome. December 2nd and 3rd the conspirators left in Rome were dramatically arrested. Somewhere in here with a rather tight schedule, Cicero defended Murena. A man with military experience whom Cicero wanted since a battle with troops of Catiline seemed immanent.
It is interesting that Cicero begins his speech in a calm and laid back manner. He exudes confidence. At the end of the speech he issues a strong plea for the judges to consider the safety of the state. I have a feeling that this contrast was essential for the success of his case. Otherwise Cicero could have been taken as somewhat hysterical- which would have weakened his case.
There are interesting aspects of the speech- Cicero gives interesting advice on how to get elected (43). It is also clear that the support Catiline had included people from all levels of society.
In 51 Catiline made his famous comment to Cicero's face- there are two bodies of the state- one is feeble with a weak head, the other firm without a head, while he lived his leadership would never be lacking. Cryptic yet bold and clear considering the tension of the time.
In sections 60 to 66 are the now famous and humorous remarks on Stoicism. There is humor here, no doubt. But I am not convinced that all is meant to be humorous. Especially when Cicero discusses the famous Cato the Elder (ancestor of this Cato in this trial) and how his study of philosophy produced a more tolerant understanding of people. There is more here than just mirth and production of laughter.
61- all wrong doings are equal; every crime is an unspeakable crime and he who kills a rooster is no less wrong than he who chokes the life out of his father. There is humor in this. Who would expect such a turn of phrase in context of discussion of Stoicism? But in 64 where Cicero says that if Cato had studied philosophers with more compassion for the human condition- it would not have made Cato more honest- that can not be improved upon- but it would have increased a tendency toward gentleness. This is not funny. It makes a good point about life; our attitude toward others. Cicero's comments to Cato about his great great grandfather are interesting:
sed si illius comitatem et facilitatem tuae gravitati severitatique asperseris, non ista quidem erunt meliora, quae nunc sunt optima, sed certe condita iucundius.
But if you should have scattered the gentleness and pleasantness of your ancestor upon your serious nature and stern ways, your qualities will not be better which are already exceptional but certainly your qualities would be found more pleasant.
It just seems that with this speech- there is too much focus on the humor as though that is the main thrust- to say this misses the point. Both go together- the humor and Cicero's serious nature.
In 77 Cicero uses Cato's own strict Stoicism to offer stern rebuke for Cato's use of a nomenclature. Again there is humor but also rebuke for Cato's self-righteous manner. There is the dilemma of philosophy- it is essential for improvement of one's own nature but it is dangerous to let that philosophy elevate one to arrogance and snotty superiority.
No comments:
Post a Comment