Cicero: Pro P. Sulla Oratio (review)

Abstract

Pro P. Sulla Oratio Ann Vasaly D. H. Berry, ed. Cicero: Pro P. Sulla Oratio. With introduction and commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. xxvi 1 335 pp. 2 figs. Cloth, $64.95. (Cambridge Classical Texts and Commentaries, 30) As the author points out, Pro Sulla is only the fifth of the fifty-eight extant speeches of Cicero to receive a full-scale scholarly commentary in English in this century (the last English commentary on Pro Sulla being J. S. Reid’s school edition of 1882). Berry convincingly argues that this particular speech in no way deserves the neglect into which it has fallen, for it is at once compelling as a paradigm of Ciceronian persuasive technique and invaluable as a reflection of Roman political, social, and legal affairs in the tumultuous period of the 60s b.c. Furthermore, a new edition of the text was surely called for, since neither Clark’s OCT of 1911 nor Kasten’s Teubner editions (1933, 1949, 1966) collated more than three of the manuscripts cited by each, whereas for the present edition Berry has collated all seven of the principal manuscripts and has provided [End Page 471] a complete account of the evidence (using the apparatus criticus for five of the manuscripts and providing a collation of the often corrupt readings of two others in Appendix 2). Unlike earlier editors, he has been able to draw on P. L. Schmidt’s discovery in 1974 of a collation by J. Gulielmius of the twelfth-century codex Erfurtensis. This collation, transcribed and published by Berry in 1989, is particularly valuable as it is the only reliable witness to the lost folios of the Erfurtensis which contained most of Pro Sulla. In addition to an account of the manuscripts, Berry’s full introduction treats the life of P. Cornelius Sulla; historical, political, and legal questions concerning his trial; and various aspects of the speech itself, including structure, prose rhythm, and date of publication. Here, the years Berry has devoted to preparing this work are reflected in his careful and thorough treatment of prosopography (the relationship of the defendant to Sulla the dictator is also treated in a separate appendix) and in his acute analysis of the laws under which the defendant was charged. It is interesting to note that Berry also confronts head-on two issues that ultimately concern our assessment of Cicero not as a persuasive orator or an effective politician but as an ethical human being: “Was Sulla Guilty?” and “The Morality of Cicero’s Defense” comprise the last two subsections of the part of the introduction that deals with the trial. Dismissing the hostile, and ultimately uncritical, method of some earlier scholars who tended to accept as truth the exact opposite of any assertion made by Cicero in a speech, Berry is inclined to absolve Sulla of a number of the more serious charges on which he was prosecuted, and especially of active complicity in Catiline’s attempted coup of 63. Proceeding from this thesis, he goes on to assert—rather boldly, given that the shades of Mommsen, Syme, and Carcopino still haunt any scholar willing to credit Cicero with a show of moral courage—that “if Sulla was indeed innocent of the charges relating to the conspiracy, then Cicero may be regarded as having stepped in, at great personal risk, to save a man who was innocent at least of the main charges on which he was accused, and who otherwise would have been condemned” (42). The commentary expands on various prosopographical and legal questions raised by the text, and Berry is particularly adroit at unraveling the meaning of a number of perplexing passages. Among many valuable discussions that could be cited: Roman social practice vis-à-vis the often conflicting demands of amicitia in judicial proceedings (143); Torquatus’ charges and Cicero’s strategy of response concerning the damning contents of Cicero’s letter to Pompey (265–66); the nature of Torquatus’ accusations of Sulla’s complicity in the “first conspiracy” (270–73); the editio process used to empanel the jurors in the trial (316–18). Every commentary has a unique character that reflects the preoccupations and special interests of its author. The...