A. D. Kurilova R. V. Lapyrionok, A. M. Smorchkov. Manuscript rhetorical books on elocution composed in Russia of the 18th century in Latin The augural term «lex vitiosa» in Cicero’s «Brutus» (136) (pp. 565–572)

Author

A. D. Kurilova R. V. Lapyrionok, A. M. Smorchkov (Astrakhan State University Vologda State Pedagogical University; Russian State University for the Humanities)

Keywords\n Russia of the 18th century, manuscript, rhetoric, qualities of elocution Appian, Cicero’s «Brutus», Tiberius Gracchus, the law of Spurius Thorius, lex vitiosa, ager publicus

Pages\n 565–572

Summary\n

The article reviewes the interpretations of rhetorical virtues in several hand-written Latin rhetorical books composed in Russia of the 18th century. The paper considers a passage from Cicero`s «Brutus» (Cic. Brut. 136) in which the author used an augural term «lex vitiosa». There is no precedent for the use of such a term in any other work of Cicero. Cicero was an augur whose terminology was usually precise. The term is generally considered to refer to the agrarian law of 133 BC. It is plausible that the term «lex vitiosa» is used technically here. If that is the case some religious errors must have occured when Tiberius Gracchus passed his law («lex lata contra auspicia»). Cicero must have had good reason to use an adjective such as «vitiosa». The ancient evidence is not very helpful in this respect. All modern reconstructions of the Gracchan time based on works of Plutarch and Appian, say nothing of any religious errors made by Tiberius Gracchus. The authors assume that the deposition of M. Octavius who vetoed the agrarian law of Tiberius Gracchus could be an appropriate explanation. Plebeian tribunes were sacrosanct, in the sense that any assault on their person was prohibited. This means that the deposition of M. Octavius could have been interpreted also as a crime against Roman religion, and the law – as passed faultily («vitio»). This was the reason for Cicero to describe Sempronia agraria as «lex vitiosa», but this fact does not necessarily mean that this law was passed «contra auspicia».

References\n

1. Smorchkov A.M. Religiya i vlast' v Rimskoy respublike: magistraty, zhrecy, khramy [Religion and Authorities in the Roman Republic: Magistrates, Priests, Temples]. Moscow, 2012. (In Russ.)
2. Gasparov M.L. Ciceron Mark Tulliy. Tri traktata ob oratorskom iskusstve [Marcus Tullius Cicero. Three treatises on the art of Rhetoric]. ed. M.L. Gasparov. Moscow, 1972. (In Russ.)
3. Badian E. Studies in Greek and Roman history. Oxford, 1964.
4. Bleicken J. Kollisionen zwischen Sacrum und Publicum. Eine Studie zum Verfall der altrömischen Religion. Hermes, 1957, Bd. 85. Ht. 4, pp. 446- 480.
5. Huschke E. Rezension an: A.A. F. Rudorff. Das Ackergesetz des Spurius Thorius. Zeitschrift für geschichtliche Rechtswissenschaft, Bd. 10, 1839. Kritische Jahrbücher für deutsche Rechtswissenschaft, 1841, vol. 5. Ht. 10, pp. 579-620.
6. Johannsen K. Die Lex agraria des Jahres 111 v. Chr. Text und Kommentar. München, 1971.
7. Linderski J. The Augural Law. Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. II, Bd. 16. Teilbd. 3. Berlin–New-York, 1986, pp. 2146-2312.
8. Lintott A.W. Judicial Reform and Land Reform in the Roman Republic. Cambridge, 1992.
9. Mommsen Th. Gesammelte Schriften, Bd. I. Berlin, 1905.
10. Meister K. Die Aufhebung der Gracchischen Agrarreform. Historia, 1974, vol. 23, pp. 86-97.
11. Münzer F. Titius (№ 23). RE. Reihe 2. Halbbd. 12. Stuttgart, 1937. Sp, 1563-1564.
12. Roselaar S.T. Public land in the Roman Republic. A social and economic history of Ager Publicus, 396-89 BC. Oxford, 2010.
13. Rudorff A.A. F. Das Ackergesetz des Spurius Thorius. Zeitschrift für geschichtliche Rechtswissenschaft, 1839, vol. 10, pp. 1-194.
14. Vančura. Leges agrariae. RE. Halbbd. 23. Stuttgart, 1924. Sp, 1150- 1185.