Lampas - Volume 50, Issue 4, 2017

When Cicero defended Sextus Roscius the Younger against a charge of patricide, the orator not only had to deal with the murder charge but also with two complicating factors: after Sextus Roscius the Elder had been murdered, his name had been entered on the proscription lists and his property had been bought by Chrysogonus, the freedman and favourite of dictator Sulla. Although the proscription was formally not at issue in the trial, Cicero did make good use of it to secure Roscius’ acquittal. Therefore, I argue that Cicero owes much of his success in this case to a consistently balanced combination of a formal plea to the jury and an informal plea to Chrysogonus.

This article describes Cicero’s rhetorical use of character delineation in his Pro Roscio Amerino, and the consistency with which he employs this persuasive technique throughout the speech. It is argued that the resemblance of the structure of the text to the standard rhetorical rules is superficial: Cicero’s strategies in this early speech are already in basic agreement with his mature descriptions in De Oratore. His reliance on non-rational argument cannot, however, be used to suggest that Roscius was guilty, and Cicero’s version of events may well be true, even if this cannot be proven.

Forensic narratives, narrationes, provide the speaker with a number of typically narrative advantages in the process of persuasion. It is, for instance, easier to present the perspective of an outsider in the form of a story than as part of an argumentation. Moreover, a narrative allows the narrator to portray an exceptional situation as acceptable and to insert various voices without the risk of seeming inconsistent. Stereotypes can also play a subtle and persuasive role in a story. This article will show how Cicero, in his defence of Roscius Amerinus, has used all these narrative techniques.

The article analyses elements of theatrical actio in the Pro Sexto Roscio Amerino. After some reflections on actio in Cicero’s rhetorical theory and practice, it first focuses on altercatio as a medium to increase the theatricality of the speech. The fictive discussions with opponents serve a second goal which is presented in the second part of the article: the construction of Cicero’s (theatrical and ethical) persona as the ideal and authoritative defender of Roscius’ case.

The approach Cicero takes in his defence of Sextus Roscius forces him to discuss recent political events, above all the proscriptions and Sulla’s position as dictator. This is a deliberate choice by Cicero, which does not prevent him from constructing an effective defence but allows him to combine that defence with the articulation of a vision for the Sullan res publica. This vision does not conflict with any of Sulla’s acts, but allows Cicero to argue that more work needs to be done to secure Sulla’s achievement and to suggest that he, despite his youth and lack of experience, can be part of the res publica towards which he and the jurors should work.

At several instances in Pro Sexto Roscio Amerino, Cicero refers to literary texts his audience must have been familiar with: the Iliad, Aeschylus’ Oresteia, Ennian tragedy, a comedy by Caecilius and traditional stories about the Roman past. As Cicero published the speech to be read as a book, he clearly intended his readers to assess his client’s misery and his own fearlessness in the context of great literature. The result is a stunning and heartbreaking story about a helpless victim of criminal institutions and his intrepid lawyer.