Cicero's Role Models: The Political Strategy of a Newcomer (review)

It is well known that in all his writing Cicero makes extensive use of exempla to advance his persuasive goals. These may take the form of the statements or actions of individuals or of an entire people that somehow reflect, either positively or negatively, on the issue at hand. The phenomenon has been investigated a good deal, usually genre by genre. This new study, a revised Oxford dissertation by Henriette van der Blom, differs in that it is more comprehensive, including and comparing Cicero's use of examples in the various genres, and also explores Cicero's choice of examples in relation to his position as a novus homo in Roman politics.

The first several chapters go over some familiar ground about the tendency of Romans of Cicero's time to accord great deference to their ancestors and regard their authority as virtually incontestable, as well as Cicero's own background and education. Readers of these early sections should not give up, however: more interesting and original matter lies ahead. In Rome, noble ancestry was regarded as establishing a strong claim to be elected to public office and was exploited accordingly. As a novus homo, Cicero developed strategies to compensate for this disadvantage. In particular, van der Blom finds that Cicero developed three "alternative claims to ancestry": (1) that exemplary Romans of the past can serve as exempla for all Romans, not just their family members, (2) past novi homines can serve as exempla for those currently striving to attain the highest offices, (3) one can select specific historical figures as one's personal exempla (7).

This "strategy," if such it was, applies with greatest force to Cicero in the time before and during his consulship, when he was creating rhetorical space for a non-nobilis persona. As a young man Cicero was at pains to define his own position as a hardworking and upright public servant in opposition to the established nobility, or a section of it, represented as lazy, corrupt, and hostile to novi homines. Once elected consul, he could take some pride in his achievement. Subsequently the novus homo rhetoric is mostly absent except in occasional defenses of novi homines elected in opposition to nobiles (Mur., Planc.), with the exception of some animadversions at the beginning of In Pisonem. In later life Cicero was, as van der Blom shows, concerned to establish his own exemplarity.

Van der Blom's approach yields some new insights, such as the unexpected revival of novus homo language in Cicero's late narrative of his rediscovery of Archimedes' tomb (Tusc. 5.66 with van der Blom 296). She is also good on Marius as the single Ciceronian exemplum with the widest field of application.from the stern consul putting down Saturninus' revolt in 100 b.c., to the man restored from exile (albeit, unlike Cicero, by force of arms), and to the political upstart who betrayed his commander during the Jugurthine War. There are, however, a few mistakes and misunderstandings. Readers will be puzzled by the claim that Cicero wrote "dramatic plays" (10; is she perhaps thinking of his brother Quintus?), that he functioned "as defence advocate" in the speech Pro Marcello (241), and by the denial that Hortensius was "employed as interlocutor . . . of a dialogue set in the past" (328). There is also the occasional dubious interpretation, such as the notion that Cicero's emphasis in his defense of Scaurus on the quasi-novus features of Scaurus père "can be read as Cicero's subtle attempt to reassert himself in the political game" (285). In fact, Cicero was never more in the thrall of the dynasts than at the time of this speech; the remarks on the elder Scaurus seem, rather, to be part of Cicero's attempt to create a plausible link between himself and his client; see further my forthcoming commentary on Scaur.

In general, however, van...