La etiqueta epistolar senatorial en el corpus Ciceronianonormas sociales e infracciones en el siglo I a.C.

  1. Cristina Rosillo López 1
  1. 1 Universidad Pablo de Olavide
    info

    Universidad Pablo de Olavide

    Sevilla, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02z749649

Journal:
Gerión

ISSN: 0213-0181

Year of publication: 2022

Volume: 40

Issue: 1

Pages: 115-130

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5209/GERI.79298 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Gerión

Abstract

Roman senators preferred to meet in person to talk and discuss matters that concerned them; but when this was impossible, they used letters as a substitute. Given its importance and frequency of their use, senators were aware of a number of unwritten etiquette rules governing letter writing. These rules served to avoid unwanted conflicts or, in case of infraction, to be aware that they could lead to conflict. This article proposes a study of the etiquette of epistolary exchange between senators and members of the elite regarding political issues during Ciceronian times, drawing a novel parallel with informal political conversations. The article analyses how and whom should be contacted, the rules governing forwarding and reading of letters to others and the acceptable and inacceptable excuses for not having written. This study allows us to identify the unwritten rules and norms, which makes it possible to gauge the degree of tension that these could provoke. At the same time, it examines how senators tried to adhere to them in order to avoid political clashes with their peers.

Bibliographic References

  • Accame, S. (1934): “Decimo Bruto dopo i funerali di Cesare”, Rivista di Filologia e di Istruzione Classica 62, 201-208.
  • Achard, G. (1991): La communication à Rome, Paris.
  • Beard, M. (2002): “Ciceronian correspondences: making a book out of letters”, [en] T. P. Wiseman (ed.), Classics in progress: essays on ancient Greece and Rome, Oxford, 103-144 (http://dx.doi.org/10.5871/bacad/9780197263235.003.0005).
  • Botermann, H. (1968): Die Soldaten und die römische Politik in der Zeit von Caesars Tod bis zur Begründung des Zweiten Triumvirats (=Zetemata. Monographien zur Klassischen Altertumswissenschaft 46), München.
  • Büchner, K. (1939): “M. Tullius Cicero: Briefe”, RE 7 A1, Stuttgart, 1192-1235.
  • Cadiou, F. (2018): L’armée imaginaire: les soldats prolétaires dans les légions romaines au dernier siècle de la République (=Les Belles Lettres. Mondes anciens 5), Paris.
  • Carcopino, J. (1947): Les secrets de la correspondance de Cicéron, Paris.
  • Carotta, F. – Eickenberg, A. (2011): “Liberalia tu accusas! Restituting the Ancient Date of Caesar’s Funeral”, REA 113, 447-467.
  • Cornell, T. J. (ed.), (2013): The Fragments of the Roman Historians, Oxford (http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780199277032.book.1).
  • Cristofoli, R. (2002): Dopo Cesare: la scena politica romana all’indomani del cesaricidio (=Università degli Studi di Perugia. Studi di storia e di storiografia 24), Napoli.
  • Cristofoli, R (2011): Cicerone e l’ultima vittoria di Cesare. Analisi storica del XIV libro dell Epistole ad Attico (=Edipuglia. Documenti e studi 49), Bari.
  • Deniaux, E. (1993): Clientèles et pouvoir à l’époque de Cicéron (=Collection de l’École française de Rome 182), Rome.
  • Dettenhofer, M. H. (1992): Perdita iuventus: zwischen den Generationen von Caesar und Augustus (=Vestigia 44), München.
  • Ferriès, M.-C. (2007): Les partisans d’Antoine (des orphelins de César aux complices de Cléopâtre) (=Ausonius Éditions. Scripta Antiqua 20), Bordeaux.
  • Geiger, J. (1971): A commentary on Plutarch’s Cato minor, Ph. Diss., University of Oxford.
  • Geiger, J. (1979): “Munatius Rufus and Thrasea Paetus on Cato the Younger”, Athenaeum 57, 48-72.
  • Gibson, R. K. (2012): “On the nature of ancient letter collections”, The Journal of Roman Studies 102, 56-78 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0075435812000019).
  • Grillo, L. (2016): “The Artistic Architecture and Closural Devices of Cicero’s ad Familiares 1 and 6”, Arethusa 49, 399-413 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/are.2016.0024).
  • Gunderson, E. T. (2007): “S.V.B.; E.V”, Classical Antiquity 26, 1-48 (https://doi.org/10.1525/ca.2007.26.1.1).
  • Hall, J. (2005): “Politeness and formality in Cicero’s Letter to Matius (Fam. 11.27)”, Museum Helveticum 62, 193-213.
  • Hall, J. (2009): Politeness and Politics in Cicero’s Letters, Oxford (https://doi.org/110.1093/acprof:oso/9780195329063.001.0001).
  • Hutchinson, G. O. (1998): Cicero’s Correspondence. A Literary Study, Oxford.
  • Kelly, G. P. (2006): A History of Exile in the Roman Republic, Cambridge (https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511584558).
  • López Barja de Quiroga, P. – Cordeiro Macenlle, R. (2020): Julio César: muerte de una república, Madrid.
  • Malitz, J. (1987): “Die Kanzlei Caesars: Herrschaftsorganisation zwischen Republik und Prinzipat”, Historia 36, 51-72.
  • Marshall, B. A. (1976): Crassus. A Political Biography, Amsterdam.
  • Martelli, F. (2017): “The Triumph of Letters: Rewriting Cicero in ad Fam. 15”, The Journal of Roman Studies 107, 1-26 (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0075435817000302).
  • McCutcheon, R. W. (2016): “A Revisionist History of Cicero’s Letters”, Mouseion: Journal of the Classical Association of Canada, 1013/1, 35-63 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/26576046).
  • Miller, A. B. (1914): Roman Etiquette of the Late Republic as Revealed by the Correspondence of Cicero, Ph. Diss., University of Pennsylvania.
  • Nicholson, J. (1994): “The delivery and confidentiality of Cicero’s letters”, The Classical Journal 90/1, 33-63 (https://doi.org/10.2307/3297818).
  • Nicholson, J. (1998): “The survival of Cicero’s letters”, [en] C. Deroux (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History IX, Bruxelles, 63-105.
  • Pina Polo, F. (1989): Las contiones civiles y militares en Roma (=Monografías de historia antigua 5), Zaragoza.
  • Pina Polo, F. (2017): “Circulation of information in Cicero’s correspondence of the years 59-58 BC”, [en] Rosillo-López (ed.), 2017, 81-106 (https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004350847_006).
  • Pina Polo, F. (e.p.): “The Drafting Committee of the SC de ludis saecularibus of 17 February 17 BCE and the principle of seniority-based hierarchy in official documents”, Klio.
  • Pina Polo, F. – Díaz Fernández, A. (2019): The Quaestorship in the Roman Republic (=Klio. Beihefte 31), Berlin.
  • Rosillo-López, C. (2017a): Public Opinion in the Late Roman Republic, Cambridge (https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316535158).
  • Rosillo-López, C. (2017b): “Informal conversations between senators in the Late Roman Republic”, [en] Rosillo-López (ed.), 2017, 34-51 (https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004350847_004).
  • Rosillo-López, C. (2022): Political Conversations in Late Republican Rome, Oxford (https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192856265.001.0001).
  • Rosillo-López, C. (e.p.): “Le politique, política extra-institucional y crisis: el caso de Varrón y Cicerón en 47-44 a.C.”, Cahiers du Centre Gustave Glotz 31, 315-330.
  • Rosillo López, C. (ed.), (2017): Political Communication in the Roman World (=Impact of Empire 27), Leiden (https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004350847).
  • Setaioli, A. (1976): “On the date of publication of Cicero’s letters to Atticus”, Symbolae Osloenses 51, 105-120 (https://doi.org/10.1080/00397677608590689).
  • Shackleton Bailey, D. R. (ed. & trans.)(1965): Cicero’s Letters to Atticus, vol. I (=Cambridge Classical Texts and Commentaries 3), Cambridge.
  • Shackleton Bailey, D. R. (ed. & trans.) (1977): Cicero. Epistulae ad Familiares. Vol. II. 47-43 BC (=Cambridge Classical Texts and Commentaries 17), Cambridge.
  • Stowers, S. K. (1986): Letter-Writing in Greco-Roman Antiquity (=Westminster Press. Library of Early Christianity 5 ), Philadelphia.
  • Treggiari, S. (2007): Terentia, Tullia and Publilia: The Women of Cicero’s Family, London.
  • White, P. (2010): Cicero in Letters: Epistolary Relations of the Late Republic, Oxford (https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195388510.001.0001).
Data source: Dialnet