De re publica / Vom Staat

by Marcus Tullius Cicero, Michael von Albrecht (Editor)

In Ciceros großem Dialog werden tragende Elemente jeder Staatstheorie diskutiert - etwa die Grundtypen der Regierungsformen (Monarchie, Aristokratie, Demokratie) in ihrer jeweils idealen Ausprägung und in ihren Fehlentwicklungen, das Modell vom Kreislauf der Verfassungen und das Konzept der Mischverfassung, dessen Wirkung auf die politische Geschichte des Westens kaum zu überschätzen ist.

Genres: Philosophy, Classics, Politics, Nonfiction, History, Ancient History, Political Science

420 pages, Mass Market Paperback

First published January 1, 55

About the author

Born 3 January 106 BC, Arpinum, Italy
Died 7 December 43 BC (aged 63), Formia, Italy

Marcus Tullius Cicero was a Roman philosopher, statesman, lawyer, political theorist, and Roman constitutionalist. Cicero is widely considered one of Rome's greatest orators and prose stylists.

Alternate profiles:
Cicéron
Marco Tullio Cicerone
Cicerone

Note: All editions should have Marcus Tullius Cicero as primary author. Editions with another name on the cover should have that name added as secondary author.

Reviews

[Santiago Rojas F · Rating 4 out of 5]

Me leí esto para nada, no me sirvió para absolutamente nada del trabajo final. Pero bueno Cicerón🥰

[Alex · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a philosophical dialogue in the tradition of Plato. It starts out basically as a concise retelling of Plato and Aristotle's political theories, but with a bit of Roman gloss, the latter element becoming much more stronger as the chapters go on.

There's also a lot of holes in the writing, but it could've been so much worse. Overall it doesn't affect the the chapters too much. They remain coherent, just with large segments that end up being reconstructed summaries.

Cicero, who himself was a prolific writer on philosophy and politics praises the idea of not just a philosopher king, but philosopher leadership in general, and advocates that intellectuals get involved in politics rather than shun it. Cicero's own end however perhaps proves the point of why intellectuals are reluctant to get directly involved in politics.

There's advocacy here of a mixed constitution with the history of Rome as a case study. Cicero takes a very scientific view of history. Reports apparently reached the senate of two suns appearing in the sky, but its insisted that such a strange phenomenon must have a rational explanation, much like eclipses which can terrify those who are not familiar with them. He notes that the deification of Romulus, which Cicero himself does not appear to believe in, was a testament to Romulus' good character, as even though the latter lived centuries before Cicero, it was still a literate time, when people were less likely to believe in such myths without some extraordinary motive.

He also has a very platonic view of human nature. Reason ought to remain on top, ruling over the passions like a king over his subjects. Reason is divine and philosophy, the highest pursuit, "What command, what office, what kingdom can be preferred to that condition of mind, which looking down upon all things human, and esteeming them to be the objects of an inferior wisdom, turns ever to the contemplation of those things that are divine and eternal: persuaded that they only deserve to be called men, who are refined by the sciences of humanity?"


Reason and the ability to recognize the divine are according to Cicero what separate man from the animals. In fact there is a very picturesque episode at the end in which one of the characters of the dialogue, Scipio Aemilianus, has a dream in which his grandfather, Scipio Africanus shows him the universe modeled as the ancients understood it, a spherical earth surrounded by the stars and the planets. The earth is so small, Rome is even smaller. Fame will only ever reach a certain portion of the globe and is easily forgotten. Once again Cicero's own life proves the point as I'm sure the average college educated adult now will tell you plenty about one of the most significant men in history of the Roman Republic. If fame is vanity then, one ought to focus on the soul, the mind, the good, the divine that lasts forever.

With that in mind the weakest chapters are those on natural justice. There's no such thing, argues the character Philus. The legal customs of humanity vary too much; the only natural law is self interest, which can even justify such pursuits as imperialism. What good does a nation dedicated to just war gain if it leads to their conquest by a less morally scrupulous nation.

All of this doesn't fit into the rest of the book at all, and it was obviously given for rhetorical reasons, to be refuted later, but the refutation leaves a lot to be desired, basically amounting to virtue being its own reward. In particular I disagree with the idea in that section that the death of a state is unnatural, unlike that of the individual. Earlier it's implied that Rome's location inland was beneficial because it impeded the uncontrolled growth of commercialism such as what happened to Corinth and Carthage, both incredibly wealthy cities in the ancient world, but also known for immorality, and Cicero implies that the unrestricted pursuit of wealth corrupted them. The decay of nations would've been an interesting point to pursue especially as this book was written during the last years of the Roman Republic when they were about to succumb to the autocracy that Plato warned about and Cicero even quoted.

Perhaps due to all the gaps, it does end up being a very short book, much shorter than Aristotle's Politics or Plato's Republic, but I would definitely read those before reading this one for the best experience.

[Erick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having read a number of Cicero's philosophical works, I thought I should get more acquainted with his rhetorical works. The title of this compilation certainly drew me to it. I was impressed with Cicero's Republic and thought this collection of orations would give me a more complete picture of this aspect of his thought. It certainly does that. I'm not sure all of the orations here are literally defenses of the Roman republic as such, but Cicero's republicanism can always be discerned as a primary motivation behind everything included here.

It is pretty clear that Cicero was influenced by Isocrates. I detected similar patterns of language. It also could be due to Cicero's dependence on Demosthenes, and Isocrates influence on him; but whatever the case, Isocrates was either a direct or indirect influence. Many of these orations were spoken by Cicero in a literal public forum. He did apparently alter and reedit these orations before publication, so it isn't certain how much was actually spoken and how much was only written, but at least certain portions of these were a part of a political discourse and, occasionally, a legal defense of someone. For me, the most impressive works were those that dealt with Catiline and Mark Antony. These show Cicero at his most courageous and at his most poignantly vituperative. Both these men were considered by Cicero to be serious threats to the Roman republic and he didn't mince words when he denounced them. In both cases, Cicero put his life in danger. Indeed, when he denounced the latter in a number of orations called the Philippics, Mark Antony had him murdered.

One of the things that struck me the most was how volatile the Roman republic was. Almost anything could cause assassinations and riots. We aren't quite there in our own republic, but, I must say, we are seeing a tendency towards lawlessness and extreme factionalism that is building at an alarming rate. This is more the case on one side of the political spectrum which continues to harbor Communistic anarchist thugs that need almost no excuse to riot and attack people they don't agree with. This was certainly something that happened in the Roman republic as well. Civil discourse is pretty much impossible when dealing with an ignorant mob. Cicero had nothing but contempt for mob tactics. He saw it as a constant danger to a republic. He knew, as well as I do, that there will be huge swaths of the population of any society that can be manipulated into following just about anything, or anyone, when they are blinded by emotion and programmed by propaganda. He was keen to denounce those who were threats to the republic. He attempted to expose these people before they gained too much power. In the case of Catiline, he was successful; in the case of Mark Antony, he wasn't; but it wasn't from a lack of trying in either case. Cicero had incredibly high ideals; he didn't always live up to those high ideals, but one must admit that he made an effort to do so, and given the time he was living in, he was certainly exemplary by comparison.

I should note that I felt the translation was fair, but I was put off by the tendency of the translator to resort to modern English idiom when Cicero is being facetious and engaging in hyperbole. Nothing seems more stark than reading modern English expression within a text based in Latin that is over two thousand years old. I would have preferred less concern for a modernized translation and more concern for an unsuitable rendering. Thankfully, the translator didn't indulge this tendency too often, but I found myself slightly frustrated by clearly inappropriate modern English colloquialisms (e.g. at one point she translated a kind of Gallic sandal with the English word "flip-flops" - I am not joking). If one can ignore the preceding, I think one will enjoy the translation more. Of course, it could be that I am just finicky.

[Alex Pler · Rating 4 out of 5]

"...como si pudiera existir un motivo más justo para acercarse a la política que la de no obedecer a los indecentes".

Cicerón desgrana con maestría las ventajas e inconvenientes de cada sistema de gobierno. Supo que su texto sería provocador así que lo ambientó en el pasado: lo que no sabía es que 2000 años después aún daría que pensar. El 6º capítulo es tan hermoso y poético que cuesta creerlo.

"¿Qué importa que los que nazcan después hablen de ti, cuando no lo han hecho los que nacieron antes, que fueron no menos y, la verdad, mejores?".

[Alp Turgut · Rating 3 out of 5]

Cicero'nun aynı Platon'un diyalogları tarzında kaleme aldığı "De Re Publica / On the Commonwealth / Devlet Üzerine", yine Platon'un "Devlet" ve Aristoteles'in "Politika" eserlerinin izinden giderek en iyi devlet türünün hangisi olduğunu tartışan özellikle ilk kitabıyla öne çıkan bir eser. Okumadan önce Platon'u, Aristoteles'i ve Stoa felsefesini anlamak şart; aksi takdirde kitabı okumak pek kolay olmayabilir. Öte yandan, İthaki Yayınları tarafından okuyucuya sunulan kitabın pek başarılı bir cilt olduğunu söyleyemeyeceğim. Her ne kadar tarih dersi verilen önsözü ve felsefi anlamda fazlasıyla değerli olan ilk bölümü muhteşem de olsa kalan bölümlerinin kayıp olması sebebiyle kitap bir yerden sonra etkisini fazlasıyla kaybediyor. Yazarın bir şey ifade etmeyen yarım kalmış fragmanlarını okuyucuya sunmak ne kadar gerekli tartışılır. En azından benim için pek de keyifli olmadığını belirtmem gerek.

08.09.2015
İstanbul, Türkiye

Alp Turgut

http://www.filmdoktoru.com/kitap-labo...

[Aaron Crofut · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Roman version of Aristotle's politics. Cicero takes a very negative view of Democracy, which tends to fall in love with whichever person promises the mob the most of other people's property, a situation tailor made for tyrants. Good government must allow everyone to have a say in a society that will protect their rights, rather than offer those rights up to be sacrificed to pander to the poor. This book is clearly a source that inspired the Enlightenment thinkers.

Scipio's Dream is a must read. It has a flavor of the Myth of Er but goes much deeper, creating elements that would be taken by Virgil and Dante.

"In this statement, my Scipio, I build on your own admirable definition, that there can be no community, properly so called, unless it be regulated by a combination of rights. And by this definition it appears that a multitude of men may be just as tyrannical as a single despot and indeed this is the most odious of all tyrannies, since no monster can be more barbarous than the mob, which assumes the name and mask of the people"

I read this version at http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=co....

[Александър Стоянов · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting gathering of Roman ideas and ideals. Even though the text is incomplete, Cicero's work marks an intellectual bridge between Classic Greece and Late Antiquity, represented by Plato and Augustine respectively.

[emmöbe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Basically was er hier sagt: Alle Staatsformen haben Vor und Nachteile. Aber Rom ist schon based weil es eine Mischform ist. Und Oh Ja habt ihr die Doppelsonne schon gesehen.

[Nino_ withnO · Rating 5 out of 5]

სამშობლომ(მთელმა) გშობა შენ(ნაწილი), ამიტომ თუ გინდა,რომ შენ(ნაწილი) იყო კარგად, სამშობლოზე(მთელზე) უნდა იზრუნო,ვინაიდან
თუ მთელის ერთი ნაწილი ფუჭდება, გაფუჭებული სისტემა ადრე თუ მალე შენამდეც მოაღწევს. <3

[π · Rating 4 out of 5]

wah, buku yg buka wawasan baru mengenai konsep republik! jadi, buku ini tuh isinya kumpulan diskusi yang dituangkan lewat tulisan. dalam diskusi itu orang-orang ngebahas soal, apa sih republik itu sebenarnya?

nah, di dalam buku ini terdapat lima bagian, tapi sayang ada beberapa bagian yang bolong karena teks aslinya ilang :(. bagian-bagian itu ngebahas soal konsep dasar republik, wilayah atau kota, bentuk negara (monarki, oligarki, demokratis), dan rakyat yang menjadi elemen penting dalam suatu negara.

nah, gak kayak plato yang berpikir kalau negara akan makmur kalo diisi dgn filsuf. diskusinya ini cenderung lebih optimis, mereka mikir kemajuan suatu negara itu ada pd kaum cendekiawannya sih dan pemimpin2nya tuh ga boleh serakah plus dengerin masukkan yg dikasih sama rakyat. dikasih contoh juga soal raja tullus hostillus yang meskipun dia suka berperang tapi masih patuh banget sama peraturan yang dibuat.

sebenernya aku gak begitu banyak menemukan hal baru, tapi aku seneng sama pemikiran dan diskusi mereka yg arif satu sama lain. btw, aku baca versi terjemahan dan enak untuk dibaca! sayang banget sih ini gak lengkap pdhl seru banget insight soal republik yang realitanya kacau ini dipandang dgn paham optimisme yang tinggi dan memandang hal2 baik.

[choclsote · Rating 5 out of 5]

long-tongued muscular heterosexual chickpea-daddy cicero uses words against big gay bottom slave man catilina, destroys roman saul goodman hortensius in court, honours fork tongued both the gracchi as well as their killers (i admire this open hypocrisy) and best of it all the great phillipics in which he just absolutely kills it, calling mark antony both unhygienic and gay in the same sentence with an eloquence one wouldn’t have thought possible, go off king, absolutely worth it to get yourself butchered for.
10/10 recommend

[Andrada · Rating 3 out of 5]

Before saying anything about the book itself, I have to say I was severely disappointed by the way this collection was put together. I was annoyed when I realized that it contained several speeches that were already included in other Penguin collections of Cicero’s speeches I’ve read before. Although granted, it’s my fault as well for not looking carefully enough at the book when I bought. I also didn’t particularly enjoy the fact they decided to include fragments of certain speeches instead of leaving them whole. I don’t care if Cicero went on and on about things the editor thought irrelevant, it really made me feel cheated of a complete experience.

That being said, it included some of Cicero’s finest speeches. I particularly enjoyed the speech in defence of Archias the Poet which occasioned some beautiful remarks on Cicero’s part about the value of writing and books as well as his eloquent and brutal stand against Mark Anthony in the Philippics. Of all the ancient writers, Cicero comes off as the most relatable and human. He was flawed and vain and bet on the losing horse in a world where a rapid succession of civil wars made it quite clear the Republic was no longer a satisfactory system of government and change was looming. But despite everything, Cicero stood up for the old values and putting aside his hesitance and fear, eventually took the moral stand he will always be remembered for. He may have not always lived up to his own expectations while living, but he resolutely became the man he wanted himself to be in death.

[Antonio Imperato · Rating 4 out of 5]

La Repubblica di Cicerone è un'opera estremamente difficile da recensire, per vari motivi. Ho deciso di tentare dividendo il mio commento in due parti, di cui la prima si riferisce all'opera di Cicerone in sé, e la seconda all'edizione specifica che ho letto, che deve essere menzionata.

Decido di leggere La Repubblica di Cicerone dopo aver letto l'omonima opera di Platone, sulla scia di un interesse per la filosofia politica. Rispetto a Platone, Cicerone ha più i piedi per terra, e le sue riflessioni sono maggiormente basate sulla realtà, e non su uno Stato ideale ma irrealizzabile. Cicerone stesso pensa questo, e lo afferma nella sua opera. Approvo questo approccio, lo Stato ideale di Platone mi è sempre sembrato più una distopia che altro, ad essere onesti. D'altro canto, l'opera di Cicerone è molto meno originale e memorabile di quella di Platone, e il suo pensiero sulla Repubblica romana come stato che tende alla perfezione perché equa commistione di monarchia (i consoli), aristocrazia (il senato) e democrazia (quelle scelte politiche attribuite dal diritto romano al popolo) è visibilmente macchiato dal fatto che nella Repubblica romana la vera sede del potere era il senato, che possedeva, lungi dall'essere una divisione equa, gran parte dell'autorità politica. Ed è chiaro che l'opinione di Cicerone non consideri questa evidente pecca nella costruzione dello Stato Romano, perché lui stesso ne beneficia in quanto parte dell'aristocrazia senatoria. Altre simili ipocrisie sono presenti nell'opera di Cicerone, come quella riguardante il contemporaneo disprezzo per la proprietà privata, seguita dall'affermazione che si debba fare un'eccezione per le persone particolarmente nobili e virtuose (come i membri dell'aristocrazia) a cui spetta il possesso di beni e ricchezze.

Insomma è una visione di parte, ma non lo era forse anche quella di Platone, che pensava che a capo dello Stato ideale dovesse trovarsi il re-filosofo? Quindi rispetto a Platone +1 per essere più coi piedi per terra, -1 per essere meno memorabile, interessante o coerente.

Quanto allo stile, almeno nella traduzione italiana, Cicerone si fa leggere in maniera piacevolissima, nulla da eccepire. Purtroppo gran parte dell'opera è andata persa, e quindi posso solo commentare ciò che ci è rimasto, e la frammentarietà porta inoltre alla seguente spiacevole conseguenza: seguire il filo del discorso è estremamente difficile, dando un'esperienza di lettura a scatti e frustrante. Non è colpa di Cicerone, ovviamente.

Veniamo, infine all'edizione che ho letto, edita da Bur Rizzoli e a cura di Francesca Nenci. Essa è piena zeppa delle parole di Nenci: una lunghissima introduzione, seguita da una premessa, nota al testo e le infinte note presenti a completamento delle parole di Cicerone anche quando l'opera di quest'ultimo finalmente comincia. Per quanto Nenci non sia una cattiva scrittrice e le cose che scrive siano interessanti e ben esposte... è troppo. Acquisto un libro di Cicerone e ciò che ha effettivamente scritto lui è circa un terzo del libro. In più Nenci usa un lessico super ricercato all'interno delle sue note, con parole come "banausico" o "ecumene", fallendo nello scopo di spiegare le parole di Cicerone, rendendole semmai più oscure e costringendomi a cercare costantemente il significato di questi termini, rendendo la lettura ancora più a scatti di quanto già non lo sia per la frammentarietà del testo e per la necessità costante di fermarsi e leggere le note.
Ovviamente avrei dovuto semplicemente saltare queste ultime, e forse anche introduzione e premessa, e leggere solo Cicerone, ma ahimè, ho letto il libro al 100%.

Quindi, il mio punteggio finale si basa esclusivamente sull'opera di Cicerone, perdonando completamente la sua frammentarietà e le pecche dell'edizione. Se dovessi considerare queste ultime, il mio giudizio sarebbe negativo.

[Chris Dech · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s hard to review this in terms of who and what Cicero did, because he’s Cicero, and this is pretty much a best of.

So on what basis can this volume be judged? The translation and selection, both of which are top-notch.

McElduff renders Cicero’s dense Latin into intelligible and very fluent English, while keeping Cicero entertaining and full of vigour and electric passion.

And that, I think, is what one needs to maintain when translating Cicero. He was as much an entertainer of an orator as he was a writer, politician, and philosopher. Cicero had to entertain and move people, not just with the facts available to him, but with his actual oration and rhetoric as well. And that is something this very well-selected volume and McElduff achieve.

[Bookworm · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ich fand’s echt gut geschrieben und gut verständlich durch die deutsche Übersetzung. Besonders haben mir die zusätzlichen Anmerkungen zu jedem Kapitel im Anhang geholfen die Kapitel miteinander zu verbinden. Vorallem im Vergleich mit Platons Ansicht in der Politeia ist der Aspekt der Weisheit, Tugenden und Gerechtigkeit interessiert herausgearbeitet.

[Lennart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Demokratie für Anfänger, sollte die Union sich maybe mal durchlesen. Platonischer Dialog ist ein Stil den wir definitiv zurückbringen müssen. Cicero für mich der erste Philosoph der sein massives Ego nicht an seinen Leser/innen auslässt, dafür auch noch mal Pluspunkte.

[Johan Bergström · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.7/5.

[André Jan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Hard to read due to all the missing pages. Seems like something great was lost

[Fergus Usal · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very enjoyable read on account of Cicero’s prose and rhetoric, which also serves as a good introduction to the issues that plagued the late Roman Republic.

Cicero is nothing if not biased to his political allegiance and philosophies, something that must be kept in mind as you are viewing the woes of the republic through his oratory/account—but it’s a worthwhile, fun, and engaging account nonetheless. The translation was done well, never losing any of the bravado or impact Cicero clearly spoke with, and the glossary, list of names, map, and notes provided at the back are very helpful.

[Andrew Reece · Rating 5 out of 5]

This Unique Selection Of Marcus Tullius Cicero's Political Rhetoric Demonstrates His Loyalty & Devotion To The Roman Republic.

This Penguin Classics collection of Marcus Tullius Cicero's political writing & rhetoric is entitled, 'In Defence of the Republic', & features translation work by Siobhán McElduff, who also wrote the notes & introduction. The 239-page main text is accompanied by a 28-page introduction that explores such topics as Cicero's life & political career, The world of Cicero's oratory & The circulation of Cicero's speeches. Also included is an expanded glossary with relevant terms, & maps of the Roman Republic, Italy & Sicily, Greece & the Balkans, & Asia Minor.

Marcus Tullius Cicero ranks amongst Roman history's most unique & prolific political writers, but it is his political speeches, prosecution & defense arguments, & written correspondence for which he is most remembered. Cicero held numerous governmental positions throughout his career as he progressed through Rome's cursus honorum, or 'course of honors' (a series of positions leading up to Roman consul), among them augur, quaestor, aedile, & praetor. He was from a family that had no prior experience in Roman politics, & as such was considered to be a new man, or 'novus homo', immediately excluding him from acceptance in the eyes of the senators & magistrates who were born into Roman gens with established lineages in positions of authority. A gens is a Roman family or group of families who share a last name, or cognomen, & a common origin.

Cicero achieved early renown as a Roman attorney while prosecuting corrupt governmental officials such as Gaius Verres, the Sicilian governor who allegedly embezzled the province for the astronomical sum of 40,000,000 sesterces. At the time, Roman governors were not subject to the same laws & regulations other citizens were bound to abide by. As a result, Verres was immune to prosecution during the time he was in power over Sicilia, until a young Cicero successfully prosecuted him in his famous 'Verrine Orations', also known as 'In Verrem'.

Later in his career, Cicero would uncover & eliminate the infamous Cataline Conspiracy, following a dramatic chain of events which shook the Roman world to its foundations. Cicero would deliver his famous 'Orationes in Catilinam', a scathing set of diatribes to the Roman senate delivered over a number of days in an attempt to persuade them to stand against the threat to the integrity of the Roman republic posed by the powerful oligarch. The ambitious Cicero's spirited speeches were the result of a senatus consultum ultimum, or 'ultimate decree of the senate', an emergency action legitimizing the use of aggressive force to curtail behavior considered destructive to the Roman people, in which Cataline & his band of rebels most certainly were engaging. In the days that followed, a number of the Cataline conspirators were condemned without trials or official sanctions. Unfortunately for Cicero, this proved to be very much to his detriment as he ultimately assumed the blame for the unlawful proceedings, effectively making him a criminal himself. He was banished from Rome from 58-57 B.C., & denied access to fire & water within a 400 mile-distance from the city limits, a legal status known as ignis et aquae interdictio, or 'exclusion from fire & water'. It destroyed Cicero's political career & removed him from being able to influence Roman senatorial affairs.

Much later, Cicero developed a notorious & very public rivalry with the powerful triumvir & Caesarian augur Marc Antony. The two men could not abide one another, & Cicero's decision to publicly issue his famous 'Orationes Philippicae', a fourteen-part politically-motivated diatribe which condemned Antony for numerous reasons, many related to his personal life. The Philippics, as they came to be known, ended up being the final straw for Cicero & he was tracked down & condemned to death on the orders of Marc Antony in the year 43 B.C.

This collection of Cicero's fiery oratory focuses on his efforts to root out corruption, avarice, & immorality in the world of Roman politics, but it also features a selection of his notable defense speeches, which he delivered to defend the powerful men who attempted to shield him from the tenacious opposition he encountered in his defense of the Roman republic. 'Pro Sestio' & 'Pro Milone' showcase Cicero's defense of powerful, influential men who not only helped protect him as his career developed but also were instrumental in recalling him from exile in the wake of the Cataline conspiracy. This compilation's material originates from nine Ciceronian sources in total.

A few of the segments found in 'In Defence of the Republic' also appear in 'Cicero: Selected Works', also published by Penguin Classics, but the translations are different, providing the reader with a unique perspective. Many of the arguments & principles used in Cicero's orations incorporate Roman law into the text, & he does not always take the time to explain every clause, or aspect, of the laws he utilizes during the speeches. In his defense of Archias the Poet Cicero adds weight & impetus to his arguments by incorporating laws such as the 'lex Plautia Papria de Civitate Sociis' & the 'lex Julia de Civitate Latinis' as he defends his client, who was trying to achieve full legal status as a Roman citizen. McElduff does a superlative job explaining the intricacies of these Roman statutes & in some cases the historical context behind the laws being when they were first passed. When defending Titus Annius Milo for the murder of Publius Clodius in 'Pro Milone', Cicero attempts to leverage laws such as Sulla's 'lex Cornelia de sicariis' & Pompeii's 'lex Pompeia de vi' which in some cases protected men charged with murder if the act was done in self-defense or the murder victim was a known agitator engaging in acts of public violence. The translator's notes prove invaluable as the reader progresses, explaining the terms in an engaging manner which makes learning about them enjoyable & interesting. One of the main reasons Cicero so fervently defended the poet Archias was tied into his aspiration for Archias to at some point compose a poem immortalizing Cicero's role in overthrowing the Catiline conspiracy, a hope that never was realized. This did not stop the self-righteous Cicero, renowned for his tendency to exaggerate his own worth, from attempting to write his own poetry. Much as the reader might guess, his linguistic proficiencies did not include among them the ability to compose eloquent, classical verse, & McElduff's wry note informing the reader that Cicero's homage to himself, '..only survives in fragments, not all of them a credit to Cicero's poetic talents.'.

In closing, 'In Defence of the Republic' is a fantastic read, & despite the subject matter being on the detailed end of the spectrum, particularly in the area of Cicero's references to specific laws, people, & events, McElduff's notes & introduction are very successful in mitigating the steepness of that challenge. Those seeking further information on the Catiline conspiracy would be well-served with the Penguin Classics edition of A.J. Woodman's translation of 'Sallust: Catiline's War, The Jugurthine War, Histories', as well as James T. Carney's standalone study, 'Catiline, Rebel of the Roman Republic: The Life & Conspiracy of Lucius Sergius Catilina'. Finally, Robert Graves' translation of Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus' 'The Twelve Caesars' is one of the best & most enjoyable beginner's introductions to Roman history, & as McElduff references the 'Divus Julius' chapter in the book, it does hold some relevance to what's to be found here. Ian Scott-Kilvert's Penguin Classics translation of Plutarch's 'Makers of Rome' features the 'Lives' of both Marcus Tullius Cicero & Marc Antony &, would be an excellent choice to provide the reader with historical background for this selection. Thank you so very much for reading, I hope you enjoyed the review!

[Aaron Crofut · Rating 5 out of 5]

It seems hard to believe ten years have passed since I read this last, though I'm not sure why: I'm certainly very different than I was then, and so is the world I live in. Perhaps it is just the idea that ten years could go by almost unnoticed save for this marker.

But some things don't change, and my appreciation for this book apparently falls into that category. Cicero was a master when he wasn't praising himself, and my recent appreciation of St. Augustine owes no small debt to Cicero's influence upon the great Doctor. The classical view of a commonwealth as more than a matter of contract, as more than a matter of the form of government, as something more primitive and deeper than utility, is an important one in understanding many of the disturbances upsetting the Western world today. Community has almost a mystical quality to it and we undermine community at our own peril. Community is more than functioning laws and markets, and Cicero rightly notes that a state can continue even if the Commonwealth has ceased. Cicero lived in a time when it became apparent that the old Rome, the polis or small state, was no more; that Rome had morphed into something beyond its own constitution, despite the continuation of the forms (the Consuls, the Temples, the Forum, and all of the other trappings that expressed the meaning of Rome but were not the meaning themselves). Rome's constitution would change with the death of Cicero; its culture would stagger along, trying to justify its telos with an odd marriage of philosophy and paganism, but Rome as Scipio understood it would be blown to dust by a carpenter from Nazareth only a few decades after the death of Cicero.

The anniversary of which happens to be tomorrow. As beautiful as Scipio's Dream is, I hope tomorrow Cicero will celebrate his anniversary of a far more beatific vision, one that does not depend upon us saving the state or the community, but upon joining a far more perfect society.

[Anderson Paz · Rating 4 out of 5]

A obra contém seis pequenos livros. Seu formato é semelhante ao utilizado por Platão: diálogos entre interlocutores. A fala destacada, que evidencia as opiniões de Cícero, são concentradas em Públio Cipião.
Livro um, o autor faz críticas aos regimes monárquico, aristocrático e democrático. Defende uma combinação dos três: um poder monárquico que disponha de uma aristocracia que possa influenciar as decisões e que o povo disponha de sua liberdade cívica.
Livro dois: trata do mito da criação de Roma por Rômulo. Também apresenta a sucessão de reis que consultavam a vontade do povo, até a subida ao poder de Sérvio. A partir disso, a monarquia tende à tirania em Tarquínio. Vários momentos de mudanças de poder: às vezes, mais força ao rei, às vezes, mais força ao Senado.
Livro três: existe uma lei natural que deve ser respeitada, independentemente das mudanças legais do regime. Reforço a ideia de que a República exige uma combinação entre os regimes.
Livro quatro: os cidadãos devem conservar uma vida pura e honesta na República.
Livro cinco: as instituições e tradições têm sustentado Roma. A República deve ser bem organizada com base em uma boa constituição política.
Livro seis: Deus origina todas as coisas e o homem deve ser íntegro, ao passo que a República deve seguir o império da lei.
Vemos nessa obra várias ideias consolidadas na modernidade. É uma obra fundamental para a história da teoria política.

[Olivia · Rating 4 out of 5]

I adore Cicero and will openly admit that if I could go back in time and meet one character from ancient history it would absolutely 100% be him. So I'm a bit biased, but so is the translator in his notes. I say that because I think he makes remarks about Cicero's personality that only make sense if you ~only~ read his political speeches. Not a big deal because the translation is great, but it just bothers me that people can't seem to separate his political personality, which is off putting because of his use of rhetoric (something Cicero himself acknowledges), and what is presented in his philosophical works and letters to his friends, which paints him as a deeply emotional and sensitive (and brilliant) man, who just really loves his country and is sometimes flawed because, well, we all are.

That said, the translator captures the rhetoric perfectly and it was great to read. I was hoping for more unbiased translator notes, but overall having them there was helpful for the reader to contextualize the speeches, even if it comes off as he is trying to sour the reader against Cicero before the speeches even begin at times.

[Santiago González · Rating 4 out of 5]

La obra en sí no es especialmente original (bebe teóricamente muchísimo de Polibio, también de Platón y Aristóteles, aunque estos también están en Polibio), está fragmentada pero es de gran valor, y fue enormemente apreciada, además tiene interesantes noticias históricas, fruto del gran estudio en bibliotecas como Varrón y están plasmados los ideales republicanos que le costaron la vida a Cicerón.

Lo mejor de la obra es que gracias a seguir a La República de Platón es que contamos con un mito final, el ''Sueño de Escipión'' que tanto interesó a paganos como Macrobio y a cristianos como san Agustín o más tarde en el renacimiento Erasmo, que veían en él un relato cristiano. Esa parte final me ha sido de gran agrado.

[Paithan · Rating 2 out of 5]

I think a lot of it went over my head, but there were a couple of good points.

Cicero's idea that only Wise Men should compose the state made me think he, in Jungian terms, was alluding to Individuated persons. And that made me think about how far back that idea goes.

This book also contains a very entertaining story of Romulus, more specifically his rise to power. It is a through and through Hero's Story, reminiscent of both Moses and Jesus. All three 'heroes' were threatened as babies, but grew up to save their people in some way.

[Aniket Samant · Rating 3 out of 5]

There are quite some good points in the book about how a nation should be run - in the form of argumentation surrounding the merits and demerits of an aristocracy, a "pure democracy", and a monarchy - but given the historical context and the characters involved in the book it all feels difficult to get through without taking enough pauses. It comes off as quite dry writing/translation in many places and feels repetitive beyond a certain point. Didn't get much to think about from this book (or at least this edition).

[Dvdlynch · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars (I really wish good reads allowed fractional star ratings). I docked half a star for the footnotes being placed at the back of the book. Given the context required to make sense of Cicero's speeches having them at the bottom of the page would be much more useful. I also recommend reading the short biographies and definitions of political terms in the back of the book before tackling the speeches themselves.

[Pierce Presley · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Republic was a good read. It helped expound the three simplest forms of government: (1) monarchy, (2) aristocracy, and (3) democracy; and from these three, Cicero sought to explain a mix of the three was the best option: A Republic.

Sadly, many of the pages of Cicero’s Republic have been lost to history, so his later Books (or Chapters) are choppy and hard to understand. However, they are still enjoyable for the little nuggets they contain.

[Ethan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Gotta recommend this for any fan of history or rhetoric. While the mannerisms are clearly outdated and difficult to understand, the book makes an excellent job of explaining them in the footnote section. For anyone who likes the rise and fall of the Roman Republic, this book is a must read and a very interesting perspective of the power and sway of the pen in Roman times.

[mymona · Rating 5 out of 5]

loved the drama in here. bit hard to get through but context really helps and thats just the fun of Roman texts =)

the inner workings of the senate and the feuds and the way people just looked at each other so interestingly seen through the eyes of one mna. he doesnt show everything of course but he does give us an amazing example and intro to so much more.