Author: Thein, A.
Title: Lex Valeria or Cornelia. The Proscription Law at Cicero, S. Rosc. 125
Review/Collection: "Athenaeum", 113, 1
Place edition: Como
Editor: New Press Edizioni
Year edition: 2025
Pages: 212-219
Keywords: Droit - Diritto - Law, Éloquence - Eloquenza - Eloquence, Politique - Politica - Politics
Description: [Abstract] In his Pro Roscio, Cicero discusses the sale of the property of the Elder Roscius and argues that it was illegal even "by the terms of that law relating to proscription - whether it is the Valerian or Cornelian I have not been able to learn and I do not know" (Cic. S. Rosc. 125). It is a paradox that Cicero claims not to know the name of this law, because he cites one of its clauses verbatim in the following passage (Cic. S. Rosc. 126). The standard explanation is that Cicero is feigning ignorance of a law he found offensive and refused to recognise as valid. I argue for an additional layer to Cicero's moralising. The proscription law was a lex Cornelia, but Cicero pretends it was a lex Valeria to create an antithesis with the historical Valerian laws on provocatio which established the principle that Roman citizens had the right of appeal against arbitrary state violence. The message was that the proscriptions were unlawful if not technically illegal.
Works:
Link: https://athenaeum.unipv.it/index.php/2025-2/
Author initials: Thein 2025
Title: Lex Valeria or Cornelia. The Proscription Law at Cicero, S. Rosc. 125
Review/Collection: "Athenaeum", 113, 1
Place edition: Como
Editor: New Press Edizioni
Year edition: 2025
Pages: 212-219
Keywords: Droit - Diritto - Law, Éloquence - Eloquenza - Eloquence, Politique - Politica - Politics
Description: [Abstract] In his Pro Roscio, Cicero discusses the sale of the property of the Elder Roscius and argues that it was illegal even "by the terms of that law relating to proscription - whether it is the Valerian or Cornelian I have not been able to learn and I do not know" (Cic. S. Rosc. 125). It is a paradox that Cicero claims not to know the name of this law, because he cites one of its clauses verbatim in the following passage (Cic. S. Rosc. 126). The standard explanation is that Cicero is feigning ignorance of a law he found offensive and refused to recognise as valid. I argue for an additional layer to Cicero's moralising. The proscription law was a lex Cornelia, but Cicero pretends it was a lex Valeria to create an antithesis with the historical Valerian laws on provocatio which established the principle that Roman citizens had the right of appeal against arbitrary state violence. The message was that the proscriptions were unlawful if not technically illegal.
Works:
Link: https://athenaeum.unipv.it/index.php/2025-2/
Author initials: Thein 2025
