Pompey the Orator
Yüklə 303,66 Kb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- Document Outline
33
influencing the tradition of Cato in particular suggests that he also coloured the later reception of Pompey. 74 Each of the later writers had his own purpose for depicting Pompey in 3.73. Pompey: Cic. Fin. 2.57; Tusc. 1.12, 1.86; Div. 1.24; Off. 1.76, 2.20, 2.60; Phil. 5.43-4. Caesar: Cic. Div. 1.119, 2.23-4, 2.52, 2.99; Off. 1.26, 1.43, 2.23-8, 3.83-5. 74 The contemporary discussion of Cato, after his suicide at Utica in 46 B.C., in the works of Cicero, Brutus and Fabius Gallus (each wrote a Cato) and Caesar and Hirtius (each wrote an Anti-Cato): Cic. Att. 12.4.2, 12.5.2, 12.40.1, 13.27.1, 13.46.2; Top. 94; Orat. 35. Brutus‟ and Fabius Gallus‟ works called Cato: Cic. Att. 13.46.2, Fam. 7.24.2. Caesar‟ and Hirtius‟ works Anti-Cato: Cic. Att. 12.40.1, 12.41.4, 12.44.1, 12.45.2. See R.J. Goar, The Legend of Cato Uticensis from the First Century B.C. to the Fifth Century A.D. (Bruxelles, 1987), 15, 24-5, 101, and R. Stem, „The First Eloquent Stoic: Cicero on Cato the Younger‟, CJ 101 (2005), 37-49 for Cicero‟s influence on the reception of Cato. See M. Griffin, „Philosophy, Cato, and Roman suicide‟, G&R 33 (1986), 64-77 and 192-202 for philosophical aspects of Cato‟s suicide. The later tradition of Cato is reflected, inter alia, in Tac. Ann. 16.22. See R. Syme,
the suicide, and J. Geiger, „Munatius Rufus and Thrasea Paetus on Cato the Younger‟, Athenaeum 57 (1979), 48-72, at 48 n. 1 for further literature on the topic. For Catiline, F. Bücher, Verargumentierte Geschichte. Exempla Romana im politischen Diskurs der späten Republik, Hermes Einzelschriften 96 (Stuttgart, 2006), 314 argues that this exemplum is one of Cicero‟s creation more than anything else. For Cicero‟s use of Catiline as an exemplum see A.W. Robinson, „ Cicero‟s Use of People as Exempla in His Speeches‟ (Diss. Indiana University, 1986), 83-175; for Cicero‟s role in creating a standard catalogue of exempla used by later authors see 35, 161; M. Bloomer, Valerius Maximus and the Rhetoric of the New Nobility (Chapel Hill, 1992), 4-5; A.M. Riggsby, „The Post Reditum Speeches‟, in J.M. May (ed.), Brill’s Companion to Cicero. Oratory and Rhetoric (Leiden, 2002), 159-96, at 167. 34
a specific manner. Their various agendas determined their selection of evidence and the presentation thereof, which, in turn, influenced the overall picture of Pompey formed by modern scholars. Some aspects shine through more clearly than others: Pompey‟s oratorical ability when praising his own military victories, his reluctance to speak at public occasions when avoidable and vagueness of expression when a speech was unavoidable, his willingness to speak forcefully and straightforwardly when expedient (or when frustrated), and his attempts to bolster his oratory through declamation exercises and, perhaps, ghost-writing. Pompey probably avoided advertising the last aspect, but certainly built his political persona on the two first aspects. In terms of oratory, only the first aspect of self-praise and the third aspect of straightforward expressions could be said to cast light on Pompey‟s oratorical qualities.
Pompey does not fit the bill of Cicero‟s bonus orator who masters and displays all styles and techniques for the benefit of the res publica. His tactic of avoiding public performances, whether out of timidity, conscious deliberation or, perhaps more likely, both, provided him with fewer occasions for public display of oratorical talent and skill. His choice of absence does not automatically mean that he was not an accomplished speaker, but his lack of senatorial experience before his consulship meant that he had a lot of catching up to do, also on the oratorical side, when entering the senate in 70 B.C. Furthermore, Cicero‟s services in form of speeches delivered and written on his behalf, as well as Pompey‟s decision to take up declamation exercises just before the civil war, suggests that he wanted to hone his skills and make the best possible address when called upon. Velleius‟ judgement of Pompey as
35
Of course, oratorical performance was not the only way to move the political agenda in Rome or forward a political career. Indeed, descent from famous generals or senators provided a powerful claim to political influence. But Pompey‟s descent from a victorious, yet hated, general, Pompeius Strabo, made any references to ancestry a dead-end, and Pompey wisely decided not to adopt his father‟s cognomen, but instead waited for his own exploits to be crowned by the name Magnus. 75 Patronage from a politically dominant figure or family could also help pave the way, and in his early career Pompey certainly exploited his connections to Sulla and, through marriages to Aemilia and Mucia, the Metelli. His divorce from Mucia upon the return from the East and his unsuccessful marriage proposal to Cato‟s niece show that he erroneously thought that he was now the one to bestow patronage rather than benefitting from it. His need for political connections was only met when a politically savvy Caesar approached Pompey and Crassus separately to form an alliance. Here, Pompey‟s popularity with the people, re-emphasised at his triumph in 61 B.C. and based entirely on his military victories, must have made the crucial difference to Caesar‟s decision to take Pompey on board. Wealth was another factor and his inheritance of large areas of land in Picenum must have bolstered his personal fortune considerably. Influence in the local towns in Picenum mattered too, as they could soon vote and would form the powerbase of his later military commands. 76
Pompey‟s political shrewdness must be taken into consideration too. He often managed to network with the right people at the right time, although his towering status as a returning
75 See M. Gelzer, „Cn. Pompeius Strabo und der Aufstieg seines Sohnes Magnus‟, Abhandlungen der Preuβischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 14 (Berlin, 1941) for Pompey‟s family background and his father‟s influence on his early career.
76
36
general made him less attractive to the conservative and arrogant nobiles among whom he most wished to be accepted. Yet he knew when not to speak, or not to speak his mind, thereby forcing people to pay him and his words attention when it mattered. Furthermore, his well-developed sense of speaking in deliberately vague terms compelled his audience to think hard about the most likely, or most beneficial, interpretation of his words. In such situations, his behaviour and its effect appear almost regal. The effect was broken only when Pompey spoke in almost violent terms. He seems to have been most confident and eloquent when speaking in the contio, both popular and military, addressing the adoring city populace or his loyal soldiers, but could also deliver his message to a hostile audience. Being eloquentia medius was not a hindrance to a political career based on an extraordinary military ability, the resultant popularity, and a cunning sense for politics behind the scenes. 77
Wolfson College, Oxford
HENRIETTE VAN DER BLOM henriette.vanderblom@classics.ox.ac.uk
77 I should like to thank the Carlsberg Foundation, Denmark, for generously supporting a research project on Roman oratory and political career from which this article originates. I am also grateful to audiences at Zaragoza and Glasgow for useful feedback on oral versions, and to Erich Gruen, Catherine Steel, Annelies Cazemier and the anonymous referee for the journal for valuable comments on drafts of this article. 37
List of specific occasions where Pompey spoke in public: Date
Place Topic discussed Source 71 B.C., Dec. contio Pompey promises to return tribunician powers and tackle the corruption of the courts Cic. Verr. 1.44-5 71 B.C., Dec. contio Pompey solicits his discharge from military service, almost as a spectacle Plut. Pomp. 22.3 70 B.C. end public
meeting in the Forum (perhaps technically a contio) Pompey and Crassus are publicly reconciled App. BC 1.121; Plut. Pomp. 23.1-2 ?69/68 B.C. court Pompey defends a Manilius Crispus Val. Max. 6.2.4 67 B.C.
contio Dio reports a speech of Pompey in the contio where he appears reluctant to take the Gabinian command against the pirates. Possibly a literary invention Dio 36.25-36a; Plut. Pomp. 25.5-7 62 B.C.
military contio Pompey confers Roman citizenship to Theophanes of Mytilene Cic. Arch. 24; Val. Max. 8.14.3 61 B.C., Feb. contio and senate Pompey‟s first public speeches after return from the East Cic. Att. 1.14.1-4 38
61 B.C., 28 Sept. contio Pompey presents his achievements in connection with his triumph Plin. HN 7.99 60 B.C., various dates senate Pompey praises Cicero‟s consulship in several speeches Cic. Att. 1.19.7 (March 60 B.C.), 1.20.2 (May 60 B.C.), 2.1.6 (June 60 B.C.)
59 B.C. contio Pompey (and Crassus) supports Caesar‟s agrarian bill. Quotations of speech possibly literary inventions App. BC 2.10; Plut.
38.4-5
59 B.C., summer
contio Pompey discusses consul Bibulus‟ edicts Cic. Att. 2.21.3 58 B.C., 1 June
senate Senate meeting on the return of Cicero from exile. Pompey in favour but resolution vetoed Cic. Sest. 67 58 B.C., Aug/Oct. 78
colony of Capua
Pompey publicly attacks Clodius‟ law on Cicero‟s exile Cic. Red. sen. 29;
57 B.C., 1 January senate
Senate meeting on the return of Cicero. Pompey speaks in favour Cic. Red. sen. 5;
78 For dating, see Kaster (n. 1) 398 with n. 18. R.G.M. Nisbet, M. Tvlli Ciceronis in Calpvrnium Pisonem oratio (Oxford, 1961) xiii places this event in spring 57 B.C. without explicit arguments for this dating. 39
57 B.C., ca. 9 or 10 July contio Contio following senate meeting decreeing the return of Cicero from exile. Pompey speaks in favour Cic. Red. pop. 16; Sest. 107; Pis. 80 56 B.C., Febr. Court (in contiones) and senate Court speeches (in contiones) and following discussion in senate on the charges de vi against Milo. Pompey defends Milo Cic. Q Fr. 2.3.2-3;
Asc. Mil. 48C 56 B.C.
Pompey called to speak at contio by consul Cn. Lentulus Marcellinus on the question of his possible candidacy for the consulship of 55 B.C. Val. Max. 6.2.6; Plut. Pomp. 51.5-6). (Dio 39.30.1-2 places this discussion in the senate)
56 B.C., autumn
court Pompey speaks in defence of L. Cornelius Balbus Cic. Balb. 2-3, 17, 19, 59 55 B.C., Oct. court Pompey speaks in defence of L. Scribonius Libo Val. Max. 6.2.8 55 B.C.
court Pompey speaks in defence of T. Ampius Balbus Cic. Leg. 2.6 54 B.C., summer
court Pompey gives testimony on behalf of M. Aemilius Scaurus prosecuted de
Asc. Scaur. 28C 40
54 B.C., autumn 79
assembly or letter Pompey either speaks at an informal assembly of the populace outside the pomerium or writes a letter in defence of A. Gabinius in connection with the latter‟s trial de repetundis 80
Cic. Rab. post. 34; Dio 39.63.4-5 52 B.C., Jan.
Pompey speaks of planned plot of Milo to murder Pompey Cic. Mil. 65-6; Asc. Mil. 51C 51 B.C., various dates senate
senate meetings on Caesar‟s Gallic command: Pompey speaks vaguely at first, then more forcefully Cic. Fam. 8.4.4, 8.9.5, 8.8.9; Plut.
49 B.C., Feb. Italian towns Pompey‟s speeches in Italian towns to gain support for his side against Caesar in the civil war Cic. Att. 7.21.1 48 B.C., 28 Sept. not
delivered Pompey had prepared a speech in Greek to deliver to Ptolemy, which he reread in the boat going to Alexandria, moments before he was murdered Plut. Pomp. 79.2
79 For dating, see C. Klodt, Cicero’s Rede Pro Rabirio Postumo (Stuttgart, 1992), 34-6. 80 For discussion of the form of Pompey‟s testimony, see M. Siani-Davies, Marcus Tullius Cicero. Pro Rabirio Postumo (Oxford, 2001), 194. Document Outline
Yüklə 303,66 Kb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|