Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T18:29:25.876Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genre and Fact in the Preface to Cicero's De Amicitia*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2015

Paul Burton
Paul Burton*
Affiliation:
The University of Tasmania
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One can prove imposture; never authenticity.

– Roland Barthes

Over 250 years ago, the Cambridge clergyman Conyers Middleton, one of the first biographers of Cicero in the English language, said of the Laelius De Amicitia, ‘this agreeable book … must needs affect us more warmly when it is found at last to be a history, or a picture drawn from the life, exhibiting the real characters and sentiments of the best and greatest men of Rome.’ Middleton thus accepted at face value Cicero's claims in the preface to his treatise on friendship that he has reproduced, in some form, an actual conversation that took place in 129 BCE between C. Laelius and his sons-in-law C. Fannius and Q. Mucius Scaevola.

Type
Research Article
Information
Antichthon , Volume 41 , 2007 , pp. 13 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Australasian Society for Classical Studies 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Thanks are owed to A.M. Eckstein who read several early drafts of this paper and has never lost faith in its basic conclusions, and to David Konstan, Peter Davis, Jessica Dietrich, the members of the Pacific Rim Roman Literature Seminar, and the two anonymous referees for this journal, all of whom have made my arguments stronger through their incisive critiques. Any and all errors of fact and judgment that remain are my own.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Astin, A.E. (1958), The Lex Annalis Before Sulla. Brussels.Google Scholar
Astin, A.E. (1967), Scipio Aemilianus. Oxford.Google Scholar
Beard, M. (1986), ‘Cicero and Divination: the Formation of a Latin Discourse’, JRS 76, 33–46.Google Scholar
Benness, J.L. (2000), ‘The Punishment of the Gracchani and the Execution of C. Villius in 133/132’, Antichtkon 34, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benness, J.L. (2005), ‘Scipio Aemilianus and the Crisis of 129 BCE’, Historia 54, 36–48.Google Scholar
Bodens, R. (1974), ‘L'amour naturel du genre humaine chez Cicéron’, LEC 42, 50–7.Google Scholar
Bringmann, K. (1971), Untersuchungen zum späten Cicero. Göttingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Büchner, K. (1952), ‘Der Laelius Ciceros’, MH 9, 88–106.Google Scholar
Büchner, K. (1964), Cicero: Bestand und Wandel seiner geistigen Welt. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Carruthers, M.J. (1990), The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Clarke, M.L. (1968), ‘Cicero at School’, G&R 15, 18–22.Google Scholar
Combès, R. (ed.). (1971), Cicéron, Laelius deAmicitia. Paris.Google Scholar
DeGraff, T.B. (1940), ‘Plato in Cicero’, CP 35, 143–53.Google Scholar
Douglas, A.E. (1962), ‘Platonis Aemulus?’, G&R 9, 41–51.Google Scholar
Drijepondt, H.L.F. (1963), ‘Ciceros Laelius de Amicitia, eine Einheit’, AClass 6, 64–80.Google Scholar
Dussinger, J.A. (2004), ‘Middleton, Conyers (1683-1750)’, in The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford. Online at http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article18669 (as of 13 November 2006).Google Scholar
Fedeli, P. (1972), ‘Sul testo del De Amicitia di Cicerone’, RhM 115, 156–73.Google Scholar
Fraisse, J.-C. (1974), Philia: La notion d'amitié dans la philosophie antique. Paris.Google Scholar
Gruen, E.S. (1992), Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome. Ithaca.Google Scholar
Gruen, E.S. (1996), Studies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy. Reprint. Berkeley and Los Angeles (Leiden 1990).Google Scholar
Habinek, T.N. (1990), ‘Towards a History of Friendly Advice: The Politics of Candor in Cicero's De Amicitia’, Apeiron 23.4, 165-85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heldmann, K. (1976), ‘Ciceros Laelius und die Grenzen der Freundschaft: Zur Interdependenz von Literatur und Politik 44-43 v. Chr.’, Hermes 104, 72–103.Google Scholar
Heusch, H. (1953), ‘Zum Proömium von Ciceros Laelius’, RhM 96, 67–77.Google Scholar
Hommel, H. (1955), ‘Cicero und der Peripatos’, Gymnasium 62, 319–34.Google Scholar
Hornblower, S. (1991), A Commentary on Thucydides, Volume I: Booh I-III. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hutter, H. (1978), Politics as Friendship: The Origins of Classical Notions of Politics in the Theory and Practice of Friendship. Waterloo ON.Google Scholar
Jones, R.E. (1939), ‘Cicero's Accuracy of Characterization in His Dialogues’, AJPh 60, 307–25.Google Scholar
Khan, C.H. (1998), Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophical Use of a Literary Form. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Konstan, D. (1994/5), ‘Friendship and the State: The Context of Cicero's De Amicitia’, Hyperboreus 2, 1–16.Google Scholar
Laurand, L. (ed.). (1961), Cicerén: L'Amitié. París.Google Scholar
Leach, E.W. (1993), ‘Absence and Desire in Cicero's De Amicitia’, CW 87.2, 3–20.Google Scholar
Long, A.A. (1995), ‘Cicero's Plato and Aristotle’, in Cicero the Philosopher: Twelve Papers, edited by Powell, J.G.F., 37–61. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lord, J.K. (ed.). (1898), M. Tulli Ciceronis Laelius de Amicitia. Revised edition. New York (1883).Google Scholar
Meißner, K. and Weßner, P. (eds). (1914), Laelius De Amicitia. Third edition. Leipzig (1887).Google Scholar
Middleton, C. (1818), The Life of Marcus Tullius Cicero. Volume three. Reprint. Boston (1741).Google Scholar
Petersson, T. (1963), Cicero: A Biography. New York.Google Scholar
Petrocchi, G. (1959), ‘I Lelii, gli Scipioni e il mito del sapiens in Cicerone’, Ciceroniana 1, 20–77.Google Scholar
Powell, J.G.F. (ed.) (1990), Cicero: Laelius, On Friendship and The Dream of Scipio. Warminster.Google Scholar
Powell, J.G.F. (1995a), ‘Friendship and its Problems in Greek and Roman Thought’, in Ethics and Rhetoric: Classical Essays for Donald Russell on his Seventy-Fifth Birthday, edited by D. Hine, Innes H., and Pelling, C., 31–45. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, J.G.F. (1995b), ‘Cicero's Translations from Greek’, in Cicero the Philosopher: Twelve Papers, edited by Powell, J.G.F., 273–300. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, J.G.F. (1988), ‘The Manuscripts and Texts of Cicero's Laelius de Amicitia,’ CQ 48, 506–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, J.G.F. (ed.) (2006), M. Tullius Ciceronis De Re Publica, De Legibus, Cato Maior de Senectute, Laelius de Amicitia. Oxford.Google Scholar
Ricken, W. (1955), ‘Zur Entstehung des Laelius de Amicitia’, Gymnasium 62, 350–74.Google Scholar
Ruch, E. (1943), ‘Das Prooemium von Ciceros Laelius de Amicitia’, Hermes 78, 132–62.Google Scholar
Schäfer, M. (1955), ‘Panaitios bei Cicero und Gellius’, Gymnasium 62, 334–53.Google Scholar
Schmidt, P.L. (1978/9), ‘Cicero's Place in Roman Philosophy: A Study of His Prefaces’, CJ 74, 115–27.Google Scholar
Singh, K.L. (1989), ’On Friendship’, in MacKendrick, P., The Philosophical Books of Cicero, 213-22. New York.Google Scholar
Steinmetz, F.-A. (1967), Die Freundschafislehre des Panaitios nach einer Analyse von Ciceros ‘Laelius de amicitia’. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Stevenson, T. (2005), ‘Readings of Scipio's Dictatorship in Cicero's De Re Publica (6.12)’, CQ 55, 140–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stock, St. G. (ed.) (1953), Ciceronis Laelius vel de Amicitia. Reprint. Oxford (1893).Google Scholar
Thomas, R. (1989), Oral Tradition and Written Record in Classical Athens. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, F.A. (1966), The Art of Memory. London.Google Scholar
Zetzel, J.E.G. (1972), ‘Cicero and the Scipionic Circle’, HSCP 76, 173–80.Google Scholar