After Cicero Finished Speaking, Caesar Trembled! The Affect of Deprecatio in the Pro Ligario

Abstract

Abstract Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BCE) is widely recognized as Rome’s preeminent orator, a reputation that was well-earned because of his cogent and convincing skill in argumentation. His talent is particularly evident in his legal rhetoric, and his extant forensic orations are often cited as illustrations of brilliant displays of casuistry. The Pro Ligario is, however, an exception, not because the case is poorly argued, but because the unique constraints and procedures of that case prompted Cicero to depart from his normal practice of well-reasoned argument and advance a special plea for mercy and clemency or deprecatio. It is the only surviving oration in this legal genre of Roman rhetoric. An analysis of the Pro Ligario reveals that Cicero avoids arguing the stasis or issue of the case altogether, choosing rather to advance emotional appeals targeting the ethos of Caesar, who judged the case, in order to secure a favorable verdict in this rare genre of special pleading. Cicero’s unique mode of persuasion reveals a new perspective on Roman rhetoric.