Content area
Full Text
CICERO, RHETORIC, AND EMPIRE. By C. E. W. STEEL. Oxford: Oxford University Press (Oxford Classical Monographs). 2001. Pp. 254.
CAN CLOSE READING of eight very different Ciceronian speeches, chosen because they are deemed to "deal directly with" empire (3), prove that Cicero deliberately avoided giving a better and more nuanced critique of empire? Yes, according to Catherine Steel: "I argue that [in these speeches1 Cicero] is operating . . . with a concept of empire that depends not on territory, but on the power wielded by individuals," which leads Cicero to present "a moralizing view of empire which concentrates on the failings of individuals . . . , a conscious simplification [which enables] Cicero to avoid having to make public choices about the exploitation of imperial resources which could alienate many of his supporters" (4). Because Cicero "needed to pay particular attention to saying things which were attractive to his audience" (16, cf. 162) if he wanted a resplendent political career at Rome-which he so desperately did-he had good and sufficient reason to treat the problems of empire in an obfuscating, oversimplified fashion.
The audiences that would not have appreciated a thoughtful treatment of empire varied by venue and type of speech delivered, but had some shared characteristics. From the rhetorical strategies Cicero follows, well and often illuminatingly laid out in this book, Steel deduces that audiences believed that good Romans served the state, observed proper limits in personal relationships, and did not take on the characteristics of those over whom they ruled (Chapter One); that others merited...