The First Eloquent Stoic: Cicero on Cato the Younger

The First Eloquent Stoic: Cicero on Cato the Younger Author(s): Rex Stem Source: The Classical Journal, Vol. 101, No. 1 (Oct. - Nov., 2005), pp. 37-49 Published by: The Classical Association of the Middle West and South Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30038629 Accessed: 07/10/2010 16:30 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=camws. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. The Classical Association of the Middle West and South is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Classical Journal. http://www.jstor.org THE FIRSTELOQUENT STOIC: CICERO ON CATO THE YOUNGER* Abstract: Through a contextualization of the Ciceronian evidence for Cato the Younger's oratoricalpractice, this paper challenges the conventional interpretation of the Paradoxa Stoicorum 3, and therebyargues that Cato was thefirst Stoic to recognize the limitations of the traditionally jejune Stoic oratorical style and thereforeto incorporatesome oratorical embellishmentsinto his public speaking. This recognition of Cato's innovation in Stoic oratorical practice justifies and illuminatesCicero'sclaim at Brutus 118-19 that Cato was thefirst eloquent Stoic. Stoic orator had a moral obligation not to manipulate his The argument or his audience, but to focus on the truth, and to do The so with brevity and restraint. In the Stoic view, the careful and logical progression of syllogistic argumentation was much less likely to cause the hearer to assent to a false proposition than the embellishments of more expansive oratory.1 Cicero, however, believed that the Stoics' reliance on the unadorned and arid nature of dialectical argumentation made them poor orators who were unable to engage their audiences.2 This generally dismissive attitude toward Stoic oratorical practice makes it all the more notable when he allows for an exception, declaring that there was one Stoic who deservedly could be called eloquent: Cato the Younger. The significance of the Ciceronian evidence for Cato as a Stoic orator derives not only from the fact that it comes from a contemporary source, but also because that source was particularly qualified to judge.3 Previous studies I wish to thank the audience for this paper at the 2003 Annual Meeting of CAMWS in Lexington, KY, for their comments and discussion, especially David Kutzko and Robert Ulery. I also wish to thank several of my colleagues in Louisiana for their advice and criticism, as well as my referees, who offered helpful ways to clarify my argument. Translations throughout are my own. 1 For the Stoic approach to rhetoric and oratory, see Atherton (1988), Kennedy (1963) 290-9, Long and Sedley (1987) 1.183-90, Moretti (1995). 2 See de Orat. 3.65-6, 2.157-60, Brut. 120, Orat. 113-15, Fin. 4.5-7. Leeman (1963) 1.198-216, analyzes Cicero's approach to contemporary philosophical styles. For a survey of Cicero's interactions with Stoic thought throughout his philosophical corpus, see Colish (1985) 1.61-158 (esp. 79-85 on rhetorical theory). 2 Malcovati, ORF 1.404-15, presents the evidence for Cato as an orator (as does Nelson (1950)). The most frequent source is Plutarch's Life of Cato Minor, which attests nine of Malcovati's thirteen occasions on which Cato is known to have spoken THE CLASSICALJOURNAL 101.1 (2005) 37-49 38 REX STEM have presented Cato as an effective but traditional Stoic speaker,4 but I believe, based on the Ciceronian evidence (especially Paradoxa 3), that Cato was innovative in his Stoic oratorical practice. Cicero describes Cato as the first Stoic to recognize the limitations imposed by the traditional Stoic distrust of oratorical embellishment, and to realize the value, especially the political value, of embracing at least the occasional use of oratorical techniques. The Ciceronian evidence thus demonstrates how Cato was the first to bridge the gap between the forensics of political life at Rome and the traditions of Roman Stoicism. Cato's ready ability as a speaker can be demonstrated from several pieces of evidence from the Ciceronian corpus. When Cicero and Cato directly opposed one another at the trial of Murena in 63 B.C., for example, Cicero describes Cato as a formidable opponent, claiming that Cato dealt with him in an austere, Stoic fashion.5 In the publicly. But Plutarch, of course, never heard Cato speak, and says (23.3) that the only instance of Cato's oratory that was preserved was his speech at the Catilinarian debate on the Nones of December 63, which Cicero had recorded but which Plutarch does not seem to have read. Thus Plutarch's judgment of any specific episode is subject to the glorification of the literary and biographical tradition which grew up around Cato in the first century of the Principate (on which see Goar (1987) and Geiger (1979)), and therefore not to be trusted unless verified by another, preferably contemporary source. Sallust's rendition of Cato's contribution to the Catilinarian debate is also of limited value, for Cato's speech is too manifestly Sallustian to be able to provide convincing evidence of Catonian style (hence I have some methodological reservations about Nelson (1950) 67). Of the direct evidence for Cato's practice as an orator, only Cicero offers a contemporary evaluation. Cicero does not try to recreate Cato's persuasion, as Sallust does, but analyzes it as a historian of Roman oratory in the Brutus and admires it as a peer in the Paradoxa Stoicorum. Therefore even though Cicero certainly had his own motivations and biases, and thus evidence from his corpus must be carefully evaluated, his testimony provides the best means for understanding the specifics of Cato's oratorical practice. 4 So Kennedy (1972) 283: "considering his career as a whole Cicero allows that for a Stoic [Cato] was remarkably effective." Atherton (1988) 401-2 and 414, nuances this orthodox position, but her view is still based on the conventional interpretation of the description of Cato's oratorical practice in Parad. 3, an interpretation that will be challenged below in light of the other evidence for Cato as an orator and the language of the passage itself. Ayers (1954) 248, makes some perceptive observations about Cato as an orator, but he does not fully contextualize those observations in a discussion of the evidence. McDermott distorts the evidence to conclude ((1970) 75) that Cicero did not think Cato an orator, but "merely an indefatigable speaker." 5 Mur. 74: agit mecum austere et Stoice Cato. For Cato's status as an opponent, see Mur. 58-67, esp. 58, where Cato is described as "the foundation and strength of the whole prosecution" (fundamentumac robur totius accusationis), and note the analysis of Quintilian 11.1.70-2. The specifics of Cato's In Murenam are very hard to recover from Cicero's Pro Murena, since it is impossible to know how fairly Cicero is reporting Cato's arguments. One suspects rather unfairly, just as what Cicero says about Cato's Stoicism in the Pro Murena is perceived to have too much to do with the specifics of winning the case to be trusted as his true assessment of Cato's deployment of Stoic ideas in Roman politics (see esp. Craig (1986) as well as Classen (1985) 120-79, and Adamietz (1989)). But for what can be surmised about the strategy of the prosecution, THE FIRSTELOQUENT STOIC 39 debate over the Catilinarian conspirators, only weeks later, Cato, though but a tribune-designate, managed to turn the whole Senate to vote in favor of the death penalty for the conspirators.6 In February of 61, Cicero reports that Cato similarly turned the tide at an assembly concerning the trial of Clodius for his scandalous appearance at the rites of the Bona Dea.7 From the end of that same year and into the next, Cicero's letters to Atticus relate how he, in the name of concord, came to the support of the publicans when they wished to renegotiate the Asian tax contract. Cato alone opposed him and eventually won the day. The reasons for Cato's ultimate victory are hard to discern, but we do know that Cicero poured his oratorical heart into his position, and that Cato held up against it, much to Cicero's annoyance.8 The two passages that form the primary Ciceronian evidence for Cato's eloquence, however, both come from 46 B.C., near the very end of Cato's life. They are, first, a digression in the Brutus, and second, most of the preface to the Paradoxa Stoicorum. The Brutus presents a history of oratory at Rome organized through a series of judgments about the oratorical abilities of over two hundred Romans in the context of their political careers and influence.9 Cicero professes to be unwilling to discuss anyone still living, but he dodges this restriction by having the other characters in the dialogue introduce and evaluate living orators, whom Cicero is then willing to discuss.10 Thus it is Brutus who first introduces Cato, after which Cicero offers his explanation for Cato's success as an orator. [118] Tum Brutus:quam hoc idem in nostris contingere intellego quod in Graecis, ut omnes fere Stoici prudentissumi in disserendo sint et id arte see Alexander (2002) 121-7, who is more cautious than Ayers 1954. 6 See Sest. 61 and Att. 12.21.1 (also Sall. Cat. 50-5, Vell. 2.35.3-4, Plut. Cat. Min. 22-3). Sallust even claims that Cato and Caesar were of comparable eloquence (Cat. 54.1), which is quite a compliment to Cato, given that Quintilian thought that Caesar could have challenged Cicero for the title of best orator in Rome (10.1.114). For Caesar as an orator, see Kennedy (1972) 283-92, and Leeman (2001). 7 Att. 1.14.5: hic tibi <in> rostra Cato advolat, commulcium Pisoni consuli mirificum facit, si id est commulcium, vox plena gravitatis, plena auctoritatis, plena denique salutis. ("Cato then flies upon the rostra and delivers a remarkable thrashing of the consul Piso, if one can use the word 'thrashing' of a speech full of dignity, full of authority, full, in short, of soundness.") 8 See Att. 1.17.8-10, 1.18.6-7, 2.1.8. For Cato's side of the story, see Fehrle (1983) 108-11. 9 See Narducci (2002). Cicero's reasons for writing the Brutus are well examined by Douglas (1966) x-xxii. o10At Brut. 231 Brutus teases Cicero that he is afraid of giving offense and Cicero does not deny this (see also 244 and 248, and cf. Att. 12.12.2 and 13.19.4). See further Douglas 1966, xvii-xviii. The most carefully handled living figure is Julius Caesar, about whom Atticus does most of the talking from 252-61. Cicero leaves for himself (262) only his oft-quoted assessment of the stylistic quality of Caesar's commentaries. 40 REX STEM faciant sintque architecti paene verborum, idem traducti a disputando ad dicendum inopes reperiantur. unum excipio Catonem, in quo perfectissimo Stoico summam eloquentiam non desiderem, quam exiguam in Fannio, ne in Rutilio quidem magnam, in Tuberone nullam video fuisse. [119] Et ego: non, inquam, Brute, sine causa, propterea quod istorum in dialecticis omnis cura consumitur, vagum illud orationis et fusum et multiplex non adhibetur genus. Tuus autem avunculus, quemadmodum scis, habet a Stoicis id, quod ab illis petendum fuit; sed dicere didicit a dicendi magistris eorumque more se exercuit. [118] Then Brutus: "I am aware how the same thing occurs in our orators as it did among the Greeks, namely that almost all the Stoics are very practiced in discussion and they conduct it with skill and are almost architects of words. Yet when transferred from debate to oratory, the very same men are found wanting. For Cato alone do I make an exception, in whom, although a most perfect Stoic, I do not sense the lack of the highest eloquence. I see now how little eloquence there was in Fannius, how it was not great even in Rutilius, and how there was none at all in Tubero." [119] And I said: "That is not without cause, Brutus, since all their attention is consumed in dialectic; that wide-ranging and copious and varied type of oratory is not added. Your uncle, however, as you know, has from the Stoics that which was to be sought from them, but he learned to speak from teachers of speaking and he trained himself in their manner." The essence of Brutus' comment is the judgment that one finds throughout Cicero's corpus, namely that the Stoics, while virtually verbal architects at dialectic, are usually found to be lacking at oratory. The sole exception, Brutus asserts, is Cato, in whom he finds no lack of the highest eloquence despite Cato's "most perfect" adherence to Stoicism.11 Earlier Roman Stoics who had made efforts at oratory now suffer by comparison. Of those here listed by Brutus,12 the example of Rutilius best demonstrates the unique status of Cato. Rutilius is explicitly labeled by Cicero as representative of the tradition of Stoic n The Latinword perfectissimus, in such a context as this, contains approbation for full and complete development,both in a technicaland a moral sense. Thus Cato not only completely knows and understandsStoic doctrine (the technicalsense), but he also perfectlyembodiesthe kind of man the Stoics essayed to be (the moral sense). The superlative form further intensifies Cato's "perfected"development. The term may have been especially appropriatefor philosophers.At Leg. 1.54, for example, Cicero says that the Academic Antiochus of Ascalon was also "perfect"in his own field (in suo genereperfectus),and Rutilius Rufus is describedat Brut.114 (discussed shortly) as prope perfectus in Stoicis. At Tusc. 1.7, Cicero declares that the "perfect" philosophy would be that which could discuss the greatest questions in a full and ornate style (perfectamphilosophiamsemper iudicavi, quae de maximis quaestionibuscopiose posset ornatequedicere). 12 Moretti (1995) 91-104, surveys what we know of the Stoic orators mentioned in the Brutus. THE FIRSTELOQUENT STOIC 41 orators at Rome (116), and the reasons for his limitations as an orator are explained at the same time as his excellence as a Stoic is summarized: "His orations are weak, though there is much that is brilliant on legal matters; a learned man and well versed in Greek literature, a student of Panaetius, almost perfect in the matters of the Stoics, whose style of oratory, although quite sharp and full of skill, you nevertheless know to be meager and not well suited for winning the assent of a popular audience."13 Rutilius' most famous speech was in his own defense when put on trial for provincial misadministration (repetundae)in 92 B.C. Cicero discusses this speech at some length at De Oratore 1.227-31, where he describes Rutilius, in keeping with Stoic tradition, as disapproving of elaborate oratorical embellishment and appeals to the emotions. He took Socrates to be his model, sought to teach the jury rather than win it over and appeal to its mercy, and suffered exile as a result.14 Cicero lays the blame for Rutilius' conviction almost entirely on the manner in which the defense was conducted; an orator like Crassus, the hero of the De Oratore,could have saved him (1.230). Thus Rutilius, "almost perfect in the matters of the Stoics" (prope perfectus in Stoicis), eschewed oratorical manipulation when he could have used it the most, whereas Cato, "a most perfect Stoic" (perfectissimoStoico), achieved the highest eloquence. The comparison is contrary to expectation: Cato was the better Stoic and yet also the better orator. How is this possible? Cicero explains Cato's eloquence by identifying its source. As Cicero presents it, Cato "has from the Stoics that which was to be sought from them," presumably the rigor and logic of their doctrinal principles, but for his oratorical training he sought out different teachers, whom he then imitated (Brutus 119). Nothing else is known about these "teachers of speaking" (magistri dicendi), and Cicero's veracity on this point has been doubted.15 Since Cato 13 Brut. 114: sunt eius orationes ieiunae; multa praeclarade iure; doctus vir et Graecis litteris eruditus, Panaeti auditor, prope perfectus in Stoicis; quorum peracutum et artis plenum orationisgenus scis tamen esse exile nec satis populariadsensioniadcommodatum. 14 His conviction became a standard exemplum of the miscarriage of justice under the equestrian juries of the early first century B.C. See Alexander (1990) 49, for a complete list of the evidence. Atherton (1988) 426-7, emphasizes the moral and philosophical significance behind this "poignant reminder of Stoic oratory's almost universal uselessness in practice." 1s At Fin. 4.7, Cicero claims that Cato has his rounded phrases from the rhetoricians (a rhetoribus), which confirms that Cicero did perceive Cato to have had such teachers, but no evidence outside of Cicero exists by which to confirm the accuracy of Cicero's perception. Note Douglas ad loc. in his definitive commentary on the Brutus ((1966) 97): "Cicero has given no names and may be adjusting the facts so as to allow the Republican hero the rhetorical training which he recognized as essential to the statesman." Atherton (1988) 405-15, undertakes to explain how the Stoa could in fact have provided Cato with all he needed to become the orator he was, and suggests (414) that Cicero's rhetorical bias against the Stoa blinded him to the rhetorical 42 REX STEM apparently did not speak like his Stoic predecessors, Cicero could simply have reasoned that Cato must have learned his oratorical skills elsewhere, and so invented teachers to that end. But the crucial point here can still be indubitably advanced. Cicero felt that Cato spoke as good orators should speak to a much greater degree than a Roman Stoic ever had. The second primary piece of Ciceronian evidence for Cato as an orator comes from the very next work Cicero wrote. This work is the Paradoxa Stoicorum, Cicero's purportedly playful but nonetheless genuine attempt to demonstrate that rhetoric can make anything credible.16 Given the close proximity of the dates of composition for these two works,"17it is not surprising that Cicero's presentation of Cato's ability as an orator in the Paradoxabuilds on that of the Brutus. Cato and his oratory are in fact the inspiration for the Paradoxa,as we learn from its opening words. [1] Animadverti, Brute, saepe Catonem avunculum tuum, cum in senatu sententiam diceret, locos graves ex philosophia tractareabhorrentesab hoc usu forensi et publico, sed dicendo consequi tamen ut illa etiam populo probabiliaviderentur. [2] Quod eo maius est illi quam aut tibi aut nobis, quia nos ea philosophia plus utimur quae peperit dicendi copiam et in qua dicunturea quae non multum discrepantab opinione populari;Cato autem, perfectus mea sententia Stoicus, et ea sentit quae non sane probantur in vulgus, et in ea est haeresi, quae nullum sequitur florem orationis neque dilatat argumentum;minutis interrogatiunculisquasi punctis quod proposuit efficit. [1] I have often noticed, Brutus, that your uncle Cato, when delivering his opinion in the Senate, would discuss weighty and philosophical ideas. Although these topics were averse to such use in the Forum and in the public arena, he nevertheless brought it about by means of his oratorythat these ideas seemed acceptableeven to his popular audience. [2] This is all the greater an achievement for him than for you or me, since we associate more with that philosophy which has fostered fullness of speaking, and in which arguments are made which do not greatly differ from popular possibilities present within the Stoic tradition. Yet even if the Stoic rhetorical tradition did allow for more ornament than Cicero realized, there is still no reason to doubt Cicero's judgment that no Stoic before Cato had made effective use of it. Thus Cato should surely be regarded as the one who first broke with Stoic practice, whether or not he broke with Stoic theory. 16 Cicero claims he is playing (ludens) at Parad. 3, and even though Cicero likely did enjoy the rhetorical challenge that he set himself in this work, Englert (1990) demonstrates that Cicero's stated goals for the work have serious implications for his larger project of exploring the intersection of rhetorical and philosophical discourse with the realities of public life. See further Lee (1953) ix-xxvii, Colish (1985) 1.128-31, and Ronnick (1991) 1-6, 15-19, 105. 17 For the composition of the Brutus in the winter and spring of 46, see Douglas (1966) ix-x; for the Paradoxa,see Molager (1971) 13-16, and Lee (1953) xxviii-xxix. THE FIRSTELOQUENT STOIC 43 opinion. Cato, however, in my opinion a perfect Stoic, both holds beliefs which are not at all acceptableto the general populace and is a memberof a school which does not pursue any flowery speech or extended argument;it proves a propositionby minute little syllogisms, like pinpricks. Cicero reprises his stance from the Brutus, yet fills out the picture considerably. We here learn that Cato was not afraid to introduce weighty philosophical topics into his public oratory. And despite the inherently unpopular philosophical flavor of his remarks, he was able, by means of his oratory (dicendo), to cause these ideas to seem acceptable to a popular audience (populo).8 Moreover, Cicero goes on to point out, it is easier for Cicero and Brutus to present philosophical topics to a popular audience because their philosophy (that of the Academy) encourages fullness of speaking and does not veer all that far from mainstream opinion. But Cato, once again described as a "perfect" Stoic (perfectus mea sententia Stoicus), makes philosophical arguments acceptable to the masses despite his adherence to a philosophical school that rejected oratorical finish and instead promoted syllogistic arguments that felt like pinpricks. The evidence so far points to some conclusions about Cicero's opinion of Cato as an orator. The first is that Cato was ultimately a talented and successful orator, even though he held Stoic beliefs. The second is that Cato, whether or not he actually sought out teachers of speaking as Cicero suggests, recognized the importance of oratorical effectiveness in Roman public life and so trained himself (se exercuit, Brutus 119) to speak in a fashion which was more appealing to popular audiences than Stoic dialectic. Amalgamating the first two conclusions suggests a third, namely that Cato could speak like a Stoic when he wanted to, i.e., when discussing something appropriate for that style, and he could also speak more oratorically when his theme or audience called for it. This last conclusion finds its confirmation in the next section of the Paradoxa(3): Sed nihil est tam incredibile quod non dicendo fiat probabile, nihil tam horridum, tam incultum, quod non splendescat oratione et tamquam excolatur.Quod cum ita putarem,feci etiam audacius quam ille ipse de quo loquor. Cato enim dumtaxat de magnitudine animi, de continentia, de morte,de omni laude virtutis,de diis immortalibus,de caritatepatriaeStoice solet oratoriis ornamentis adhibitis dicere: ego tibi illa ipsa, quae vix in gymnasiis et in otio Stoici probant,ludens conieci in communeslocos. 18 See Brut. 184-200 for Cicero's argument that popular oratory is by definition successful oratory, since the orator's primary goal is to persuade his audience, and see De Orat. 1.56-7 and 3.107 for his assertion that the orator's role should include treatment of philosophical commonplaces. 44 REX STEM But nothing is so unbelievable that persuasion cannot make it acceptable, nothing is so rough or so unrefined that oratory cannot make it shine as if polished. And since I hold this view, I have acted even more boldly than the very man I am describing, for Cato is accustomed to speak in the Stoic fashion, though with oratorical flourishes added, about such subjects as greatness of soul, self-control, death, praise for virtue of all kinds, the immortal gods, and love of country, whereas I, for your benefit, have playfully developed into commonplaces those very things for which the Stoics scarcely gain approval even in the peace of their own schools. Here is the most direct evidence that Cato both was and was not a Stoic orator in the tradition of those before him. Cato spoke as the Stoics were wont to do (Stoice solet ... dicere),but he added flourishes when the subjects were particularly grand (e.g., greatness of soul, self-mastery, death, etc.), which was contrary to the Stoic habit but fundamental for his own success as a speaker. Such an interpretation is not, however, that which the Latin has usually received. Readers of this sentence have traditionally understood the ablative absolute oratoriis ornamentis adhibitis ("with oratorical flourishes added") as dependent on the idea of Cato being accustomed to speak in the Stoic manner. The Latin is thus taken to mean that the Stoics regularly embellished their oratory on particular topics,19 but such a meaning is precisely what our evidence for the Stoic oratorical tradition argues against. Cicero has just declared in Paradoxa2 that Stoics did not pursue any flowery argument (nullum sequiturflorem orationis). At Brutus 119, moreover, Cicero explicitly says that the type of oratory which is wide-ranging, copious, and varied is not added (vagum illud orationis et fusum et multiplex non adhibeturgenus) to dialectic by the Stoics. The basic sense of the verb adhibereis to apply one thing to another, and the thing applied is usually brought from outside. Thus the sense of Brutus 119 is that Stoic argumentation was based in dialectic and that nothing was added to that dialectical mode of argument when it was presented in other, less overtly philosophical contexts. So in Paradoxa 3, the oratoria ornamenta which are adhibita should be thought of as a supplement to Cato's customarily Stoic way of speaking, not something innate to it. 19 Current translations of the Paradoxareflect this interpretation. Wright (1991) 77: "For Cato adopts the Stoic practice of adding rhetorical flourishes only when he is speaking on such subjects as ...". Ronnick (1991) 136 (see also 6-7): "For Cato is accustomed to speak with rhetorical flourish, as Stoics do, only about ...". Rackham (1942) 257: "For Cato at all events follows the Stoic practice of employing the embellishments of eloquence when he is discoursing on ...". Molager (1971) 93: "Caton, en effet, c'est seulment a propos de ..., qu'en Stoicien il utilise d'ordinaire les ornements du discours". See also Atherton (1988) 414. THE FIRSTELOQUENT STOIC 45 What made Cato different is that he spoke in a way other Stoics had not. The ablative absolute would in fact be largely redundant if it were well known that to speak Stoice was to speak oratoriis ornamentis adhibitisabout certain topics. Moreover, Cicero's claim to be acting even more boldly (etiam audacius) than Cato himself implies that there was already some boldness on Cato's part, which would not be the case if Cato were merely following Stoic practice. Thus the ablative absolute oratoriis ornamentis adhibitis should be taken concessively,20 and should be understood to be that which Cato has added to the Stoic oratorical tradition at Rome.21 Cato's employment of a grander style than that of previous Roman Stoics, but only on certain important themes, suggests that on other occasions he did not stray from the meager Stoic style. Near the beginning of Cato's exposition of Stoic ethics in the De Finibus, written the year after the Paradoxa,Cicero has Cato say (3.19): Haec dicuntur fortasse ieiunius; sunt enim quasi prima elementa naturae, quibus ubertas orationis adhiberi vix potest, nec equidem eamrncogito consectari.Verum tamen cum de rebus grandioribusdicas, ipsae res verba rapiunt;ita fit cum gravior,tum etiam splendidiororatio. These topics are being discussed with perhaps not enough gusto; for they are, as it were, the first principlesof nature,to which the richness of oratory could scarcelybe applied, and I certainlyam not thinking of trying to do so. But when one is speaking about grander topics, the ideas themselves seize upon their expression,and thus the style becomesboth more impressiveand indeed more distinguished. Such a sentiment nicely summarizes Cicero's presentation of Cato as an orator in the Brutus and Paradoxa.22The passage also confirms that there were limits to the philosophical topics to which Cato was 20 Lee, ad loc. ((1953) 29), notices this. Englert (1990) 120 and 127, also understands the sentence this way, but neither Lee nor Englert remarks on the difference of this interpretation from the orthodox view or its significance for understanding Cato as a Stoic orator. 21 The difficulties of this sentence appear to have puzzled some medieval readers, for in some manuscripts nullis was inserted before oratoriis, thus attempting to gloss Stoice as "with no oratorical flourishes added," which is what readers familiar with Cicero's judgments of Stoic orators elsewhere might have expected. Molager (1971) 93, labels these MSS only as deteriores.But what those medieval readers missed is that the overall point of the description of Cato the orator in the preface of the Paradoxais to emphasize the contrast between Cato's oratory and that of previously ineffective Stoic orators. 22 Note again the sense of adhiberias "applied" (quibus ubertasorationis adhiberivix potest, cf. non adhibetur in Brut. 119 and adhibitis in Parad. 3). See Moretti (1995) 105 (and, for background, Kennedy (1963) 293), for the idea that the sentiment here expressed as ipsae res verba rapiunt alludes to Cato the Elder's famous advice about oratory: rem tene, verbasequentur. 46 REX STEM willing to apply oratorical embellishment. Cicero, on the other hand, composed the Paradoxato argue for the most "paradoxical" ideas of Stoic thought, and he admits to acting even more boldly than Cato himself (Paradoxa 3-4). Thus Cato is indeed his inspiration, but Cicero seeks to go well beyond Cato's practice in the use of oratorical flourishes in the presentation of Stoic doctrine.23 One further piece of Ciceronian evidence for Cato as an orator is of particular interest because it also reveals that Cato sometimes deliberately chose not to conform to the mold of Stoic orators before him. One of the few Stoic modifications of traditional rhetorical teaching was to add the virtue of brevity to the traditional four elaborated by Theophrastus (correctness of language, clarity, propriety, and ornament).24 Thus brevity is one of the distinctive attributes which we should expect to find in a representative Stoic orator. But Cato, as Cicero remarks when endorsing brevity in his De Legibus, demonstrated that brevity was a virtue that was sometimes best ignored (3.40). Brevitasnon modo senatoris,sed etiam oratorismagna laus est in sententia. nec est umquam longa orationeutendum, nisi aut peccantesenatu (quod fit ambitione saepissime) nullo magistratu adiuvante tolli diem utile est, aut cum tanta causa est, ut opus sit oratoris copia vel ad hortandum vel ad docendum;quorumgenerum in utroquemagnus noster Cato est. Brevity is a great virtue when giving one's opinion, not only for the senator but also for the orator. A long speech should never be employed except either when it is useful that the day be wasted because the Senateis taking a mistaken course (which most often occurs because of self-interested motives) and no magistrate is coming to its aid, or when the topic is so importantthat thereis a need for fullness, either to urge or to educate,on the partof the orator.Our Catois impressivein both of these types of situations. The last clause reads like an afterthought,25 but other evidence 23 Cicero does not disappoint, loading his argumentswith numerous rhetorical figures, and creatingin the Paradoxaa handbookof exemplaof what to say in defense of the Stoics and how to say it. Fordiscussionsof the Paradoxa's rhetoricalfeatures,see Molager (1971) 67-73, Ronnick(1991)38-50, Lee (1953)xxvi-xxvii. Yet see Englert's analysis ((1990)130-41) of why the work, overall, failed to meet the goals Cicerohad for it. The political undertonesof the Paradoxaare emphasizedby Molager(1971)1624, following Kumaniecki(1957). 24 See Kennedy (1963) 294-5 (discussing Diogenes Laertius 7.59), and Moretti (1995) 52-70. Atherton (1988) 411, calls brevity "the outstanding peculiarity of the Stoictheory"of rhetoric. 25 So it may have been. The De Legibusappearsto have been writtenlargelyin the late 50s (designed,in Platonicfashion,as a sequel to De RePublica,which appearedin 51), but was later revised and never entirely finished. See Rawson (1991) 125-9, and Dyck (2004)5-12 (and note 539-40 for discussion of this passage, includingproposed alterations of the text). Quintilian also claims that Cato was an eloquenssenator THE FIRSTELOQUENT STOIC 47 confirms that Cato was known to be a filibusterer.26 Such a reputation is precisely the opposite of what we would expect of the Stoic orator, though the passage does imply that Cato was not always prolix, but only when it was politically valuable. The rest of the time, brevity would have been his preferred course.27 But once again we see that Cato was willing and able to leave behind traditional Stoic oratorical practices when the political circumstances called for speaking more fully. Cicero saw in Cato an orator who could change the course of Stoic oratory for the better, for Cato's effort to become an eloquent Stoic was in line with Cicero's own belief in the desirability of the ideal orator to combine the traditions of rhetoric and philosophy.28 But the evidence for Cato's oratorical accomplishments outside of Cicero suggests that his praise of Cato's eloquence rightly perceived its effectiveness and was not just an exaggeration conditioned by Cicero's own goals at the time. As the first Roman who employed oratorical embellishments in order to exert a vigorous and virtuous influence over the political course of the state while retaining complete credibility as a Stoic, Cato provided a new oratorical model for the Stoic who sought prominence in public life. He embodied a Stoic way of life that justified the study and practice of oratorical technique.29 Cicero's analysis of Cato as an orator allows us to perceive his significance as the first eloquent Stoic, and Cicero's credibility as a judge of oratorical effectiveness gives weight to the conclusion that Cato's successful demonstration of the melding of (11.1.36), though he does not say what evidence supports this claim. 26 See Malcovati, ORF 1.410-3, 415, for the evidence, as well as Nelson (1950) 68, and Dyck (2004) 540. 27 As is the case with all Roman orators except Cicero, no speech of Cato survives. The only extant text from Cato's stylus is a letter written to Cicero and preserved as Fam. 15.5. It is a stiff but by no means artless explanation of Cato's refusal to vote for a formal senatorial recognition of Cicero's military activities while proconsul in Cilicia in 51-50. To what extent the style of this letter reflects Cato's oratorical style in general is impossible to determine, but it is worth noting that the final section of the letter (15.5.3) begins with the claim that Cato, contrary to his habit (contra consuetudinem meam), has on this occasion written to Cicero at some length. That this claim confirms Cato's usual preference for brevity can be seen in the fact that this letter is barely one Teubner page long, and is in reply to a letter from Cicero that was seven times as long. 28 See de Orat. 3.56-73, Wisse (2002), and Albrecht (2003) 219-38. 29 Griffin (1997) 10, emphasizes "the vitality of the example of the younger Cato" for "the ascendancy of Stoicism," and suggests that the Stoics' oratorical poverty meant that the rise of the Stoa could not occur until the political oratory of the Republic lost its importance under the Principate. Yet if Cicero was correct in judging Cato the first eloquent Stoic, then Cato would have been the one to provide the Stoa with the oratorical exemplum it needed to develop its influence amidst a rhetorical culture. The fundamental importance of the exemplum of Cato for Stoic conduct in the early Empire makes it likely that his approach to oratory was also influential. 48 REX STEM Stoic principles with the oratorical practices of Roman public life was what finally brought the concept of a Stoic orator into the Forum. REXSTEM LouisianaState University WORKS CITED Adamietz, J. 1989. Marcus Tullius Cicero, Pro Murena, mit einem Kommentar. Darmstadt. Albrecht, M. von. 2003. Cicero'sStyle: A Synopsis. Leiden. Alexander, M. C. 1990. Trials in the Late Roman Republic:149-50 B.C. Toronto. 2002. The Casefor the Prosecutionin the CiceronianEra. Ann Arbor. Atherton, C. 1988. "Hand Over Fist: The Failure of Stoic Rhetoric."CQ 38: 392-427. Ayers, D. M. 1954. "Cato's Speech Against Murena." CJ49: 245-53. Classen, C. J. 1985. Recht - Rhetorik - Politik: Untersuchungen zu Ciceros rhetorischerStrategie.Darmstadt. Colish, M. L. 1985. The Stoic Traditionfrom Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages. Leiden. Craig,C. P. 1986."Cato'sStoicismand the Understandingof Cicero'sSpeech for Murena."TAPA116:229-39. Douglas, A. E., ed. 1966. M. Tulli CiceronisBrutus. Oxford. Dyck, A. R., ed. 2004. A Commentaryon Cicero,De Legibus.Ann Arbor. Englert, W. 1990. "Bringing Philosophy to the Light: Cicero's Paradoxa Stoicorum."Apeiron 23: 117-42. Fehrle, R. 1983. Cato Uticensis. Darmstadt. Geiger, J. 1979. "Munatius Rufus and Thrasea Paetus on Cato the Younger." Athenaeum57: 48-72. Goar, R. J. 1987. The Legend of Cato Uticensis from the First Century B.C. to the Fifth Century A.D. Brussels. Griffin, M. 1997. "Philosophy, Politics, and Politicians at Rome." In M. Griffin and J. Barnes, eds., PhilosophiaTogataI. Oxford. rev. ed. 1-37. Kennedy, G. 1963. TheArt of Persuasion in Greece.Princeton. 1972. TheArt of Rhetoricin the Roman World.Princeton. Kumaniecki, K. 1957. "Ciceros Paradoxa Stoicorum und die rbmische Wirklichkeit." Philologus 101: 113-34. Lee, A. G., ed. 1953. M. Tulli CiceronisParadoxaStoicorum.London. Leeman, A. D. 1963. Orationis Ratio. Amsterdam. 2001. "Julius Caesar, The Orator of Paradox." In C. W. Wooten, ed., The Orator in Action and Theoryin Greeceand Rome:Essays in Honor of George A. Kennedy.Leiden. 97-110. Long, A. A., and D. N. Sedley. 1987. TheHellenistic Philosophers.Cambridge. Malcovati, E., ed. 1976. Oratorum RomanorumFragmenta LiberaeRei Publicae. Turin. 4th ed. McDermott, W. C. 1970. "Cato the Younger: loquax or eloquens?" Classical Bulletin 46: 65-75. Molager, J., ed. 1971. Ciciron: Les paradoxesdes stoiciens. Paris. Bude ed. Moretti, G. 1995. Acutum dicendi genus: brevith,oscuritz, sottigliezze e paradossi nelle tradizioniretorichedegli stoici. Bologna. Narducci, E. 2002. "Brutus:The History of Roman Eloquence." In J. M. May, THE FIRSTELOQUENT STOIC 49 ed., Brill's Companionto Cicero:Oratoryand Rhetoric.Leiden. 401-25. Nelson, H. 1950. "Cato the Younger as a Stoic Orator." Classical Weekly 44: 65-9. Rackham, H. 1942. Cicero: De Oratore III, De Fato, Paradoxa Stoicorum, De Partitione Oratoria.Cambridge. Loeb ed. Rawson, E. 1991. "The Interpretation of Cicero's De Legibus." In Roman Culture and Society:CollectedPapers.Oxford. 125-48. Ronnick, M. V. 1991. Cicero's 'Paradoxa Stoicorum': A Commentary, an Interpretationand a Study of Its Influence.Frankfurt am Main. Wisse, J. 2002. "De Oratore: Rhetoric, Philosophy, and the Making of the Ideal Orator." In J. M. May, ed., Brill's Companion to Cicero:Oratory and Rhetoric.Leiden. 375-400. Wright, M. R., ed. 1991. Cicero On Stoic Good and Evil: De Finibus Bonorumet Malorum LiberIII and ParadoxaStoicorum.Warminster.