Writing assignment: 500 words on this topic: “If you had been Catiline, what would you have said to undermine Cicero’s case?”
The “Catiline Orations” were a collection of four speeches given by Marcus Cicero in 63 B.C, the year that he was a consul of Rome. These speeches were written about another politician, Lucius Catiline, who was planning a conspiracy to overthrow the Roman Senate. Cicero delivered the first speech to the Senate talking directly about the dangers of letting Catiline stay in Rome, while Catiline himself was in the room.
Cicero had specific motivations when composing this speech. First and foremost, Cicero wanted to make Catiline flee Rome without using direct violence. He did this by scaring and isolating Catiline and the supporters Catiline had left in the Senate. He threatened Catiline with legal action, even execution, but secretly wanted to avoid it. While killing Catiline without a trail was in Cicero’s power as a Roman consul, it would not be the best choice in terms of public relations.
In his speech, Cicero appeals to the political authority of the Senate of Rome so that they would side with him. He emphasizes the threat that a conspirator like Catiline holds in the republic, and reminds everyone of the traditional treatment of conspirators, which was execution.
Cicero was a master of rhetoric and knew how to expose someone without making direct accusations. He attacks Catiline’s character and morals, and subtly declares his alleged crimes against the republic. It seemed to be easy for him to win over the Senate. Cicero was even able to present himself as a victim. The Senate is clearly on Cicero’s side after the speech. The speech is political but not judicial, that is, it did not make a formal court accusation against Catiline.
Cicero accused him of crimes without clear evidence. It seems that at least a few of his accusations were true, but Catiline may have been able to gain some footing by pointing out Cicero’s lack of sources, especially those about his personal relationships. This will undermine the overall integrity of Cicero’s speech, causing the audience to become skeptical of it.
Cicero also says that he is speaking with the Roman gods’ authority, or that they support him. This is a very bold claim, and he offers no logical proof of this. This may have been an acceptable and legitimate claim at the time, but if not, I think that Catiline should have confronted him about it.
Cicero depicts Catiline as practically the source of all evil in Rome and associates him with all the vulgar, lowly people, which is a very dramatic use of rhetoric. Catiline could try to use Cicero’s tactics against him, and bring up potentially unpatriotic or illegal deeds Cicero has done in the past to villainize him like Cicero was doing to Catiline.
If I was Catiline, I would not be able to undermine Cicero’s case because I am nowhere near as good a public speaker as Cicero was.
It seems that Catiline was not able to defend himself from the allegations, so after this speech, he fled Rome by Cicero’s suggestion. There is little that Catiline could have said in his position, considering Cicero’s skill in persuading his audience with rhetoric, but the tactics I mentioned would have been able to help him.
Cozy Oubliette 