Tools

FRL IV: ORATORY, PART 2

T 1 Cic. Brut. 239

[Cicero:] etiam L. Torquatus elegans in dicendo, in existimando admodum prudens, toto genere perurbanus.

On Behalf of L. Sergius Catilina (F2)

F 2 Cic. Sull. 81

quin etiam parens tuus, Torquate, consul reo de pecuniis repetundis Catilinae fuit advocatus, improbo homini, at supplici, fortasse audaci, at aliquando amico. cui cum adfuit post delatam ad eum primam illam coniurationem, indicavit se audisse aliquid, non credidisse.

110 C. LICINIUS MACER

C. Licinius Macer (tr. pl. 73 BC; RE Licinius 112), the father of C. Licinius Macer Calvus (165), fought as Tribune of the People for the restoration to the People of the powers that L. Cornelius Sulla had taken away from them. Later, when he came back from a provincial governorship, Macer was charged with extortion before the praetor Cicero in 66 BC and either took his own life in advance of the condemnation or died suddenly (TLRR 195; Plut. Cic. 9.2;

298

110 C. LICINIUS MACER

T 1 Cicero, Brutus

[Cicero:] Also L. Torquatus, elegant in speaking, very sound in critical judgment, in all respects a man of perfect urbanity.

On Behalf of L. Sergius Catilina (F 2)

As consul in 65 BC, Torquatus spoke in support of L. Sergius Catilina (112), prosecuted by P. Clodius Pulcher (137) on a charge of extortion (TLRR 212).

F 2 Cicero, Pro Sulla

Furthermore, your father, Torquatus [L. Manlius Torquatus (146)], when he was consul [65 BC] defended Catiline—an immoderate man, but a suppliant; reckless perhaps, but once a friend—concerning a charge of extorting money. Inasmuch as he [Torquatus] appeared for him [Catiline] after that first conspiracy had been reported to him, he indicated that he had heard something, but did not believe it.

110 C. LICINIUS MACER

Cic. Att. 1.4.2; Val. Max. 9.12.7; on his life see FRHist 1:320–31).

Macer was a friend of L. Cornelius Sisenna (89) and also wrote an historical work (T 2; FRHist 27). In Cicero, Macer is described as an able pleader, while his fame wasmarred by his character. His language was unremarkable, and his delivery was not particularly impressive; his speeches were characterized by careful collection and arrangement of the material (T 1).

299
DOI: 10.4159/DLCL.fragmentary_republican_latin-oratory.2019