Author: Larsen, Julian
Title: Cicero, Antony and the Senatus Consultum Ultimum in the Second Philippic
Review/Collection: In : Stevenson,Tom & Wilson, Marcus (Eds.), Cicero's Philippics: History, rhetoric and ideology, Polygraphia, coll. "Prudentia", Auckland, 2008, 374 p.
Year edition: 2008
Pages: 168-180
Keywords: Éloquence - Eloquenza - Eloquence, Histoire - Storia - History, Politique - Politica - Politics, Rhétorique - Retorica - Rhetorics
Description: Julian Larsen recognises the manipulation that is going on in the Philippics, the de-legitimising of Cicero’s enemies, and the suspect interpretations of legal instruments in the interests of Cicero's political goals. He notes in particular Ciceros arguments about the senatus consultum ultimum in the Second Philippic, where the orator adopts an extreme reading of what this measure permits, surely as a warning to Antony. Furthermore, in apparent contrast to flamboyant claims made earlier in his career he now says that he lacked personal enmity towards his political opponents during his consulship and stresses that responsibility for passing the SCU has always rested with the Senate as a whole. Larsen finds a cautious and consistent denial of sole responsibility for his actions as consul. There is a message of persuasion here about the death penalty, and about collective security residing in collective responsibility. The message is directed at the consuls and the Senate. [Stevenson & Wilson 2008, 9]
Works:
Author initials: Larsen 2008
Title: Cicero, Antony and the Senatus Consultum Ultimum in the Second Philippic
Review/Collection: In : Stevenson,Tom & Wilson, Marcus (Eds.), Cicero's Philippics: History, rhetoric and ideology, Polygraphia, coll. "Prudentia", Auckland, 2008, 374 p.
Year edition: 2008
Pages: 168-180
Keywords: Éloquence - Eloquenza - Eloquence, Histoire - Storia - History, Politique - Politica - Politics, Rhétorique - Retorica - Rhetorics
Description: Julian Larsen recognises the manipulation that is going on in the Philippics, the de-legitimising of Cicero’s enemies, and the suspect interpretations of legal instruments in the interests of Cicero's political goals. He notes in particular Ciceros arguments about the senatus consultum ultimum in the Second Philippic, where the orator adopts an extreme reading of what this measure permits, surely as a warning to Antony. Furthermore, in apparent contrast to flamboyant claims made earlier in his career he now says that he lacked personal enmity towards his political opponents during his consulship and stresses that responsibility for passing the SCU has always rested with the Senate as a whole. Larsen finds a cautious and consistent denial of sole responsibility for his actions as consul. There is a message of persuasion here about the death penalty, and about collective security residing in collective responsibility. The message is directed at the consuls and the Senate. [Stevenson & Wilson 2008, 9]
Works:
Author initials: Larsen 2008
