H.'s investigation of the ways in which Cicero introduced theatrical elements into his judicial speeches offers a new perspective on Roman oratorical practices. By thoughtful analysis of the admittedly scanty evidence (see p. 155) for ‘non-verbal devices employed by advocates’ (p. 2), H. makes the case for the orator as actor, one who uses gesture, props and costume to strengthen his case and influence the jury, judges and onlookers. H. likens judicial theatre to today's political theatre, aptly describing his own book as ‘a study of showmanship’ (p. 2).
Following a short introduction, the book unfolds in five chapters and a conclusion. There is also a very extensive bibliography and three indexes (locorum, nominum and general).
Chapter 1, ‘Judicial Theater in Ancient Rome: Some Basic Considerations’, sets the stage for Cicero's practices by considering his predecessors’ activities, including examples from Livy (display of battle scars), Cato the Elder (the Libyan fig) and Cicero's own citation of Galba's use (in 149 b.c.e.) of his sons and his ward as props at De or. 1.228. H. raises the issue of the possible compromise of an aristocrat's dignitas (considered more fully in Chapter 3), but concludes that the desire to win could overcome requirements of social etiquette. After a discussion of Greek rhetorical theory and practice regarding theatrics (pp. 10–13), H. considers social and political theatre in Rome, drawing primarily on Tib. Gracchus’ performances in contiones in 133 b.c.e., to illustrate how precedents set in the political arena were adapted by advocates. He concludes that such theatricality is ‘a natural extension of existing social practices, rather than specifically oratorical techniques’ (p. 18). This section ends with a discussion of M. Antonius eliciting tears from the defence (and weeping himself) at a trial. The rest of the chapter includes discussions of quaestiones perpetuae; Cicero as performer; oratory and acting (including how not using theatrics could harm the defendant's case); and Cicero's reservations about populist speech. The final section of the chapter recounts Cicero's use of ‘stunts’ in the two early speeches, the Pro Roscio Amerino and the Verrines; H. adds an important caveat regarding the unsolvable problem of the resemblance of the published speech to the delivered (or undelivered) one.
Chapter 2, ‘A Sordid Business’, focuses on the use of mourning clothes in the courts. H. opens with a useful discussion of the uses of sordes, dirtied clothes, in Roman society in funerary contexts, times of misfortune or injustice, or as protests. A consideration of sordes in political theatre follows, with emphasis on Cicero's donning of sordes to appeal to the people during the attacks by Clodius that led to the orator's exile; this decision was one ‘that Cicero came to regret’ (p. 47), as, according to Plutarch, it backfired by giving Clodius more opportunities to harass and ridicule Cicero. Turning to judicial contexts, H. argues that in Cicero's day, ‘donning sordes involved an extended social performance, rather than a simple costume change’ (p. 51), and supports this claim with a discussion of the use of sordes in the Verrines (pp. 52–8). This is tempered, however, by H.'s astute observation (based on Mur., Scaur., and Rosc. Am.) that ‘a defendant's sordes played only a minor role in Cicero's attempts to stir pity in his audience during his speeches’ (p. 60; H.'s emphasis). Once again, H. offers a caveat – ‘we must be wary of the fallacy of conventionalization’ – the use of sordes could be risky and should be limited (p. 63).
Chapter 3 deals with appeals and supplications in the courts. Again, interpreting the written evidence for physical actions is tricky, and H. is appropriately cautious. He argues that supplication was prevalent in Roman society because of patronage and the enormous inequalities of wealth and power in society. Only if the stakes were very high did aristocrats engage in supplication; it was ‘urgent and dramatic’ and yet ‘inherently ambiguous’ (pp. 68–9). H. supports this claim with careful attention to Cicero's word choice in the ‘language of appeal’ (p. 75), especially in the peroration. H. provides examples of the use of adult props, i.e. the defendant's family (Pro Fonteio) or fellow townsmen (Pro Caelio); child props, usually the defendant's son(s) (Sull., Sest., Flac.); and the orator himself playing the role of one closely connected to the defendant. H. argues convincingly that the last type of appeal most often occurs in speeches delivered after Cicero's return from exile, when he claims that he was saved by the defendant: ‘[h]aving thus put himself center stage, Cicero can now link his fate with that of Sestius … A vote against Sestius (he implies) is in effect a vote against Cicero’ (p. 83; see also p. 127). The exception is the Pro Flacco (59 b.c.e.), where Cicero uses the Catilinarian conspiracy ‘as his emotional link with the defendant’ (p. 84). A discussion of pleas without props concludes with an excellent recounting of the emotional appeal generated by Cicero in his defence of Milo (pp. 89–93) and a look at the tactics of pleading before the dictator Caesar (Lig.).
Chapter 4, ‘Shedding Tears in Court: When Crying is Good’, is a full and well-argued consideration of the use of actual weeping during a trial. H. begins with a discussion of Roman attitudes towards tears, offering examples from Cicero's letters during exile and after the death of Tullia, when Cicero was criticised for excessive weeping, a sign of weakness. But tears could be appropriate in some situations ‘when they conveyed a sense of social solidarity with family and friends’ (pp. 105–6) and were considered a moral obligation (p. 113). Taking into account the nuances of language and word choice, H. makes a convincing case for taking Cicero literally in reference to his tears in court (pp. 108–9), especially in the Pro Plancio and the Pro Cispio, both discussed in detail (pp. 109–16). Again stressing the ethical obligation felt by Cicero towards some of his clients, H. points out ‘the effective deployment of these emotional theatrics’ (p. 116) in the Pro Rabirio Postumo, Pro Milone, Pro Caelio and Pro Sulla, carefully examining each case and noting differences and similarities in the tearful appeals. The Pro Caelio, for instance, ‘demonstrates Cicero's flexibility in technique’, in that the tears are not in the peroration, and ‘attests once again to his belief in the effectiveness of this form of pleading’ (p. 121). The Pro Sulla, on the other hand, has no actual references to tears and weeping, but conveys the idea of Cicero's emotional empathy by the use of the phrase dolor animi (pp. 121–2). The point is well made. Finally, H. notes that the consideration of tears in court is important for several reasons: oratorical technique (not from the handbooks, p. 126), the cultural value of tears in Ciceronian Rome and the impact on the jurors.
The final chapter treats ‘Judicial Theatrics Beyond Cicero’, in particular Antony's performance at Caesar's funeral. More interesting to me and relevant to H.'s study is the discussion of several passages from Cicero's De oratore (pp. 141–4) in which he explicates his own feelings about theatricality in judiciary contexts. Quintilian's views are presented as well (pp. 144–54).
Working with very little hard evidence, H. has illuminated the concept of judicial theatrics and their effectiveness through a careful study of Cicero's speeches. His book has helped us to understand the manipulation of emotion by non-verbal means, and to see the ways in which such behaviour was intrinsic to Roman aristocratic culture. Cicero indeed excelled in performance; H. has excelled in explaining the orator's judicial theatre to us in this fine book.
