Cicero's “dust”

The Defense of Cluentius has been acclaimed as Cicero's greatest speech, a “victory for a questionable client under very difficult conditions.” Cicero's own critique, that he had “thrown dust in the eyes of the jurors,” presents obvious problems for critics. If, as most suggest, a major deception took place, how could this speech be judged the greatest effort of a man who subscribed to the vir bonus doctrine of Cato? Since most of the speech discussed the events which led up to the specific allegations and not the allegations themselves, some critics suggest that Cicero did not deceive the jurors so much as divert their attention from his client to his more culpable opponent. This paper explores a third possibility, that Cicero recognized that jurors may not always use the criteria of good argument to resolve legal disputes but may turn instead to cultural norms. More precisely, they may reward the party that fulfills those values society cherishes and punish the party who violates them. If so, the Defense of Cluentius can be seen not so much as a deception or even a diversion but rather as a consummate effort of adapting a weak substantive case to prevailing cultural values and thereby achieving an impressive and difficult persuasive victory

Adversary · Argument (complex analysis · Art · Cicero · Computer security · Deception · Doctrine · Epistemology · Literature · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Victory · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Classical Antiquity Studies · Computer Science · Law · Philosophy · Psychology

• The Moral and Political Tradition of Rome

  E T Salmon, Donald Earl et al.•The Classical World•1968

  Añadir item

• The Murder Charges in Cicero's Pro Cluentio

  Gabriele S Hoenigswald•Transactions and Proceedings of…•1962

  Añadir item