Caelius Morally Dubious Behavior: Cicero

He references specific claims made by Procopius in Secret History and then to the best of his ability discusses the position. He uses findings of contemporary experts to support or refute the claims made against the Empress. By presenting the reader with ample evidence he tries to validate the actions of Theodora, and analyze instances where she may have not acted appropriately and abused her powerful position as Empress. The research conducted by Mallet finds that in Procopius’s Secret History Theodora’s private life is shoddily explained and in many instances doesn’t utilize facts that can be corroborated by any records of the time. He suggests that the stories presented in Secret History of Theodora’s life before becoming empress are merely gossip and most likely based off rumors.

Throughout the Pro Archia Poeta Oratio, Cicero employs many elements in his speech to convince the jurors in the trial of Archias’ innocence in regard to his citizenship and his contributions to Roman society. He achieves this not through brash accusations or bragging of his own character, but by through epideixis, or praising speech, as he praises the ability of the jurors, Archias’ tale of glory, his character, and his contributions to the Roman empire. Throughout his speech, Cicero uses epideictic rhetoric to interweave elements of pathos, ethos, and logos to convince the jurors of Archias’ legal, and expected, status of citizenship.

This ancient Athenian murder trial centralizes around the expectations of marriage, the role of women in ancient Greece, and the dangers a husband faces after failing to properly supervise his wife. Euphiletus stands accused of the murder of Eratosthenes, his wife’s lover. According to Athenian law, if a husband finds his wife in bed with another man, it is the husband’s right to determine what penalty the male adulterer will face. The Husband could demand he pay a fine, or even justifiably kill him. The time period of Euphiletus’ trial had come to acknowledge financial compensation as the common settlement for such offenses. Eratosthenes’ family is having Euphiletus prosecuted for premeditated murder; leaving Euphiletus to convince a jury

This essay compares the Ancient Greek speech "Against the Stepmother" and an episode of Law and Order: Special Victims Unit entitled "Legitimate Rape", with the purpose to display the ways the court cases depicted in both the speech and television episode are both similar and different. "Against the Stepmother" consists of a young man accusing his stepmother for killing his father and was written in Athens between 420 to 411 BC. The Law and Order: Special Victims Unit episode "Legitimate Rape" was aired on March 27, 2013, and depicts a court case dealing with a woman named Avery accusing her co-worker, Purcell, of rape and stalking. Despite the temporal and cultural differences, there are significant similarities in regards to the use of rhetoric and evidence. Yet, there are immense differences between these two such as the use of lawyers and police in modern cases and the need to appeal to Gods in Ancient Greek times which vastly segregates the two cases.

These are heavy accusations in Rome and would definitely turn many of Cataline’s sympathizers, if there were any, against him. This seems to at least partially root Cicero’s orations in fact, but at the same time Cicero is striving to raise himself both in the eyes of the current Roman people and posterity. Cicero was

In this speech, Cicero depicts himself as the authoritarian severe disciplinarian, social commentator and judge. Cicero’s exclamatory rhetorical questions in the opening censure Catiline’s indecent outrages, and how the latter has long abused the patience of the senate, despite the fact that, the whole republic knows all his misdemeanors. Cicero asserts his position as the consul, and declares the intolerance of his consulship to activities that might destabilize the public peace. His position as the consul is the most important in this opening. Cicero’s conclusion is that the violence that is applied in a verbal context has a greater effect on one’s opponent than the physical violence that is applied through the use of a weapon. His recognition

The three main sources used in this essay are Julius Caesar by Joshua J. Mark, Caesar, Julius by Justin Cornfield, and The Twelve Caesars by Suetonius. The twelve Caesars by Suetonius is the only contemporary source; Suetonius lived and wrote the book within one hundred years of Julius’ death. The twelve caesars is the most reliable because it is a contemporary source. Historians do not know much about his education when he was a child up to when his father died, but they know that he studies rhetoric later in life.

One of the techniques used by Cassius is the use of pathos, or emotional appeal. Being that Caesar has grown very popular/powerful around Rome, Cassius explains that if they continue to let him rule, they’ll only succeed in becoming

Textual analysis – only a sample. In Pro Caelio 27b-28, Cicero responds to the prosecution's criticisms of Caelius' lifestyle and character. This passage exemplifies several key strategies Cicero employs throughout the speech to defend Caelius.

Cicero had many tough decisions during his life. One of these was what to do about Catiline and his conspirators. Cicero had made a law that prohibited people from running for legislatures to not be able to bribe voters in order to get elected. Catiline, while running for a position in the legislature, knew that this law had been partially made because of him. Catiline wanted to obtain consulship and overthrow the Roman government. Catiline, at first, just wanted to kill the two consuls, but then he decided to kill all of the Senate. Although Catiline was planning on killing the men running the government, he still tried to get legitimately elected. Catiline recruited other conspirators

Greek-born consul Cassius Dio denotes her imperious nature, stating Agrippina “was leaving no stone unturned in order to make Nero popular with the masses” (Dio 1914, p. 28). Dio was an eminent historian considered to represent the dominant view of later upper-class Roman society. Yet, reliability is questionable as derogatory language choices make Dio’s inclination against Agrippina obvious. Suetonius and Tacitus share this disposition. All three historians corroborate in reference to Agrippina undertaking all possible actions to enhance Nero’s status as Claudius’s heir over Claudius’s paternal son Britannicus’.

" If this man alone were put to death, I know that this disease of the Republic would be only checked for a while, not eradicated forever." Cicero then turns to declaring Catiline and his fellow conspirators a disease and that would merely lie dormant in the veins of Rome.(Safire 263) Through use of such imagery Cicero successfully depicts his concerns with the handling of Catiline and his fears of the future. To further Cicero's imagery of Catiline and his fellow conspirators I will address them as a cancer. Cicero's reasoning is that it is easier to cut out a cancer when it is located in a single area. Allow the cancer to spread and it now becomes intertwined with the fabric of society, not only making it harder to remove but infecting the

As Nussbaum said, “He thinks it so terrible to contemplate a human being assaulting or stealing from another human being. Even a lie to the enemy seems to him the gravest desecration of the very concept of human fellowship. And yet if the same people are starving and my nation has a surplus, it seems to him just fine.” A major point that Nussbaum disagrees with Cicero on is that to someone really free within, slavery and rape are not any worse than poverty. Nussbaum expands on this view and explains that “The human being is not like a block or a rock, but a body of flesh and blood that is made each day by its living conditions.

Calpurnia’s first reason for wanting Caesar to stay at home is her fear of the supernatural events and the chaos in Rome, so she convinces him of her points with ethos and pathos. In the first line,

After the trump started his presidency, hate crime seemed to have increased massively. According to political scientists, Islamophobia is increasing the threat of terrorism. Some Americas have this fear that Muslims are going to ‘Islamize’ America which is--Islam is somehow trying to take over America or the world. But the possibility for a takeover is low as Muslim Americans are barely 1% of the total population in America. Islamophobia isn't just wrong in the sense that it's unethical for Americans but also, wrong in the sense that it's fundamentally inaccurate. Islamophobia is making the threat greater it is undermining our national security goals and thus, is dangerous. Islamophobia leads to hate crime against the Muslims in America. And, according to the FBI, hate crime data shows a clear sharp increase in hate crimes targeting Muslims beginning, in particular, around 2010 and maintaining a sustained heightened level. Trump, through media, is handing propaganda directly to the extremists. His hate speeches and his recent Muslim ban is giving the extremists exactly what they want-evidence that the West hates all Muslims. The extremists, who are barely 1% or less of the Muslim population in the world, are trying to recruit from the other 99% of Muslims and asking them to join their war against the West.