Caesar & Cicero: study guide

Research, teaching and reference · 研究、教学与参考

Cicero workspace · Caesar workspace · Source and activity register

Advanced undergraduate and graduate; optional language support and research extensions.

Editorial study activities with mechanically checked source extraction; independent scholarly and pedagogical review remains open.

Ligarius: advocacy and clemency · 利加里乌斯：辩护与宽赦

Who can pardon, and on what terms?

Ligarius’ release has a different decision setting from a jury acquittal. Caesar’s civil-war narrative describes a different occasion; shared vocabulary does not establish a continuous policy.

Read the linked case or full-text context before the session; translations in existing readers may support access, but the original edition remains the citation control.

Learning outcomes

Session · 60 minutes

  1. Locate · 10 min — Read Pro Ligario 29–30 and Civil War 1.22 in context. Identify who speaks, who decides, and the occasion.
  2. Compare · 20 min — Mark requests, reported actions and evaluations separately. Construct a two-column evidence table; do not infer a continuous policy from shared vocabulary.
  3. Argue · 20 min — Write a 150-word provisional comparison with two exact loci and a counter-reading.
  4. Review · 10 min — Exchange claims. Identify one inference that the passages cannot establish.

Assessment criteria

Extension: Compare the modern interpretations in the reference list. Identify what further cases each generalisation would require. For a geography extension, compare Civil War 1.5 and 1.8 with Suetonius, Caesar 31–32 and Plutarch, Caesar 32. Locate Ravenna and Ariminum in the atlas, and separate named places from any inferred journey or crossing coordinate.

Cicero, Pro Ligario 29–30

Contemporary forensic speech · A release won by an appeal for mercy is a different kind of result from a jury’s acquittal.

haec ego non dicerem, Tubero, si aut vos constantiae vestrae aut Caesarem benefici sui paeniteret. nunc quaero utrum vestras iniurias an rei publicae persequamini. si rei publicae, quid de vestra in illa causa perseverantia respondebitis? si vestras, videte ne erretis qui Caesarem vestris inimicis iratum fore putetis, cum ignoverit suis. itaque num tibi videor in causa Ligari esse occupatus, num de eius facto dicere? quicquid dixi, ad unam summam referri volo vel humanitatis vel clementiae vel misericordiae.

urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi033.perseus-lat2:29

Edition apparatus
  • misericordiae β, Zielinski: misericordiae tuae αγ
causas, Caesar, egi multas equidem tecum, dum te in foro tenuit ratio honorum tuorum, certe numquam hoc modo: ignoscite, iudices; erravit, lapsus est, non putavit; si umquam posthac. ad parentem sic agi solet, ad iudices: non fecit, non cogitavit; falsi testes, fictum crimen. dic te, Caesar, de facto Ligari iudicem esse; quibus in praesidiis fuerit quaere: taceo, ne haec quidem conligo, quae fortasse valerent etiam apud iudicem: legatus ante bellum profectus, relictus in pace, bello oppressus, in eo ipso non acerbus, totus animo et studio tuus. ad iudicem sic, sed ego apud parentem loquor: erravi, temere feci, paenitet; ad clementiam tuam confugio, delicti veniam peto, ut ignoscatur oro. si nemo impetravit, adroganter: si plurimi, tu idem fer opem qui spem dedisti.

urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi033.perseus-lat2:30

Edition apparatus
  • equidem Aah: et quidem HVDβm
  • quaere βh: quaerere αam
  • acerbus fuit γ
  • totus animo αa: tametsi totus hm: tametsi totus animo β: iam est totus animo Madvig
  • ac studio β
  • sic αh: sic agi solet βa
  • apud β: ad αγ
  • erravit... fecit γ
  • ignoscas γ

Cicero. M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes, Vol. 6. Clark, Albert Curtis, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1918. · Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University; Cicero. M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes, Vol. 6. Clark, Albert Curtis, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1918. · CC BY-SA 4.0

Caesar, Civil War 1.22

Participant war narrative · Participant narrative and political self-presentation; the account ends in the Alexandrian crisis. Chapter alignment only; no sentence or word correspondence asserted.

Quarta vigilia circiter Lentulus Spinther de muro cum vigiliis custodibusque nostris colloquitur: velle, si sibi fiat potestas, Caesarem convenire. facta potestate ex oppido mittitur, neque ab eo prius Domitiani milites discedunt, quam in conspectum Caesaris deducatur. cum eo de salute sua orat atque obsecrat ut sibi parcat veteremque amicitiam commemorat Caesarisque in se beneficia exponit, quae erant maxima: quod per eum in collegium pontificum venerat, quod provinciam Hispaniam ex praetura habuerat, quod in petitione consulatus erat sublevatus. cuius orationem Caesar interpellat: se non maleficii causa ex provincia egressum, sed uti se a contumeliis inimicorum defenderet, ut tribunos plebis in ea re ex civitate expulsos in suam dignitatem restitueret, et se et populum Romanum factione paucorum oppressum in libertatem vindicaret. cuius oratione confirmatus Lentulus, ut in oppidum reverti liceat, petit: quod de sua salute inpetraverit, fore etiam reliquis ad suam spem solacio; adeo esse perterritos nonnullos, ut suae vitae durius consulere cogantur. facta potestate discedit.

urn:cts:latinLit:phi0448.phi002.perseus-lat2:1.22

Julius Caesar. C. Iuli Caesaris Commentariorum Pars Posterior Qua Continentur Libri III De Bello Civili. Du Pontet, Renatus, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1901. · Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University; Julius Caesar. C. Iuli Caesaris Commentariorum Pars Posterior Qua Continentur Libri III De Bello Civili. Du Pontet, Renatus, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1901. · CC BY-SA 4.0

Published reading

Robert Morstein-Marx, Julius Caesar and the Roman People (Cambridge, 2021), chapter 8, “Caesar’s Leniency”.
Publisher chapter summary checked online, 2026-10-02; full chapter not reviewed in this source check.
A competing interpretation of leniency for further reading. The publisher summary questions simple models of permanent subordination after pardon; test the argument against its full evidence before adopting it.

Andrew M. Riggsby, Roman Law and the Legal World of the Romans (Cambridge, 2010), p. 25.
Printed p. 25 checked directly against ; publisher bibliographic record checked, 2026-10-02. No full-book review claimed.
Distinguish the ancient institutions producing law from the evidence historians use to reconstruct them. This methodological distinction does not decide any of the particular cases in these routes.

Andrew M. Riggsby, “The Politics of Geography,” in Luca Grillo and Christopher B. Krebs (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to the Writings of Julius Caesar, pp. 68–80; consulted p. 68. Local volume copyright 2018; publisher chapter metadata 2017.
Printed p. 68 checked directly against ; copyright-page/publisher date difference retained, 2026-10-02. No full-chapter review claimed.
Compare selective geographical narration with later dramatization. A proposed narrative strategy is an interpretation; a physical background or historical map does not identify a Rubicon crossing or prove authorial intention.

Milo: trial and later accounts · 米罗：审判与后世记述

Two accounts, how many witnesses?

Dio is a later account. The selected excerpt and longer chapter share an edition; a second display adds no new witness. Plutarch’s Life of Cicero is distinct from the Lives of Caesar and Pompey.

Read the linked case or full-text context before the session; translations in existing readers may support access, but the original edition remains the citation control.

Learning outcomes

Session · 60 minutes

  1. Locate · 10 min — Read Dio 40.54.1–4 and Plutarch, Cicero 35.4, then open their surrounding contexts.
  2. Compare · 20 min — List what each author reports and what each evaluates. Mark any proposed causal explanation as an interpretation.
  3. Argue · 20 min — Create a witness table with author, genre, narrated occasion, evaluative language and unknown dependencies.
  4. Review · 10 min — Explain why the excerpt and full Dio chapter count as one displayed witness, and why independence from Plutarch remains unproven.

Assessment criteria

Extension: Consult a published commentary and test whether its source argument resolves a specific dependency or leaves it open.

Cassius Dio, Roman History 40.54.1–4

Later historical account · Dio writes centuries later. The conviction is distinct from his causal account of fear and from the anecdote about publication; no causal share can be assigned to Cicero from this alone.

τά τε οὖν δικαστήρια ἡσύχως ἐκ τούτων συνήγετο, καὶ ἐδικαιώθησαν ἐπί τε ἑτέροις τισὶ πολλοὶ καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ τοῦ Κλωδίου φόνῳ ἄλλοι τε καὶ ὁ Μίλων, καίτοι τὸν Κικέρωνα συναγωνιστὴν ἔχων.

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0385.tlg001.perseus-grc2:40.54.1

ὁ γὰρ ῥήτωρ ἐκεῖνος τόν τε Πομπήιον καὶ τοὺς στρατιώτας ἐν τῷ δικαστηρίῳ παρὰ τὸ καθεστηκὸς ἰδὼν ἐξεπλάγη καὶ κατέδεισεν, ὥστε τῶν μὲν παρεσκευασμένων μηδὲν εἰπεῖν, βραχὺ δέ τι καὶ τεθνηκὸς χαλεπῶς φθεγξάμενος ἀγαπητῶς μεταστῆναι. τοῦτον γὰρ τὸν λόγον τὸν νῦν φερόμενον ὡς καὶ ὑπὲρ τοῦ Μίλωνος τότε λεχθέντα χρόνῳ ποθʼ ὕστερον καὶ κατὰ σχολὴν ἀναθαρσήσας ἔγραψε·

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0385.tlg001.perseus-grc2:40.54.2

καὶ δὴ καὶ τοιόνδε τι περὶ αὐτοῦ παραδέδοται. ὁ Μίλων τῷ λόγῳ πεμφθέντι οἱ ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ ἐντυχών (ἐπεφυγάδευτο γὰρʼ ἀντεπέστειλε λέγων ὅτι ἐν τύχῃ αὐτῷ ἐγένετο τὸ μὴ ταῦθʼ οὕτω καὶ ἐν τῷ δικαστηρίῳ λεχθῆναι· οὐ γὰρ ἂν τοιαύτας ἐν τῇ Μασσαλίᾳ (ἐν ᾗ κατὰ τὴν φυγὴν ἦνʼ τρίγλας

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0385.tlg001.perseus-grc2:40.54.3

Edition apparatus
  • a)ntepe/steile Reim., a)ntape/steile L.
ἐσθίειν, εἴπερ τι τοιοῦτον ἀπελελόγητο. τοῦτο δὲ ἔγραψεν οὐχ ὅτι τοῖς παροῦσιν ἠρέσκετο (πολλὰ γὰρ ἐπὶ τῇ καθόδῳ ἐπετόλμησενʼ ἀλλʼ ἐς τὸν Κικέρωνα ἀποσκώπτων, ὅτι μηδὲν χρηστὸν ἐν τῷ τῆς ἀπολογίας καιρῷ εἰπὼν ἔπειτα ἀκάρπους λόγους καὶ ἐμελέτα καὶ ἔπεμπεν αὐτῷ, ὥσπερ τι ὠφελῆσαι τότε αὐτὸν δυναμένους.

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0385.tlg001.perseus-grc2:40.54.4

Edition apparatus
  • e)/pempen Leuncl., ei)=pen L.
  • duname/nous Leuncl., duna/menos L.

Cassius Dio. Dio's Roman History, Vols. 3-6. Cary, Earnest, editor. London: William Heinemann; New York, NY: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1914-1917. · Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University; Cassius Dio. Dio's Roman History, Vols. 3-6. Cary, Earnest, editor. London: William Heinemann; New York, NY: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1914-1917. · CC BY-SA 4.0

Plutarch, Cicero 35.4

Later biographical account · Plutarch and Dio are separate surviving accounts, but their ultimate source independence is not established here. Their character judgements are not verdict reasons.

τότε δʼ οὖν ἐπὶ τὴν τοῦ Μίλωνος δίκην ἐκ τοῦ φορείου προελθών καὶ θεασάμενος τὸν Πομπήϊον ἄνω καθεζόμενον ὥσπερ ἐν στρατοπέδῳ, καὶ κύκλῳ τὰ ὅπλα περιλάμποντα τὴν ἀγοράν, συνεχύθη καὶ μόλις ἐνήρξατο τοῦ λόγου, κραδαινόμενος τὸ σῶμα καὶ τὴν φωνὴν ἐνισχόμενος, αὐτοῦ τοῦ Μίλωνος εὐθαρσῶς καὶ ἀνδρείως παρισταμένου τῷ ἀγῶνι καὶ κόμην θρέψαι καὶ μεταβαλεῖν ἐσθῆτα φαιὰν ἀπαξιώσαντος· ὅπερ οὐχ ἥκιστα δοκεῖ συναίτιον αὐτῷ γενέσθαι τῆς καταδίκης· ἀλλʼ ὅ γε Κικέρων διὰ ταῦτα φιλέταιρος μᾶλλον ἢ δειλὸς ἔδοξεν εἶναι.

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0007.tlg055.perseus-grc2:35.4

Plutarch. Plutarch's Lives, Vol. VII. Perrin, Bernadotte, editor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1919. · Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University; Plutarch. Plutarch's Lives, Vol. VII. Perrin, Bernadotte, editor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1919. · CC BY-SA 4.0

Published reading

Andrew M. Riggsby, Roman Law and the Legal World of the Romans (Cambridge, 2010), p. 25.
Printed p. 25 checked directly against ; publisher bibliographic record checked, 2026-10-02. No full-book review claimed.
Distinguish the ancient institutions producing law from the evidence historians use to reconstruct them. This methodological distinction does not decide any of the particular cases in these routes.

Gabinius: two proceedings · 加比尼乌斯：两场诉讼

One person, two proceedings

The maiestas acquittal and repetundae conviction are separate proceedings. Cicero’s roles differ. Dio’s account and Cicero’s letters retain their own dates, voices and limits.

Read the linked case or full-text context before the session; translations in existing readers may support access, but the original edition remains the citation control.

Learning outcomes

Session · 60 minutes

  1. Locate · 10 min — Open both Gabinius case records. Read Dio 39.63.1–5 and Q. fr. 3.9.1.
  2. Compare · 20 min — Create separate rows for maiestas and repetundae. For every role/outcome, give a source and distinguish explicit report from reconstruction.
  3. Argue · 20 min — Explain one tension between the dossier, letter and later narrative. State whether your proposed resolution is evidenced or only possible.
  4. Review · 10 min — Audit a partner’s table for swapped charges, conflated outcomes or an unsupported motive.

Assessment criteria

Extension: Read the letter’s surrounding correspondence and assess how addressee and sequence affect the interpretation.

Cassius Dio, Roman History 39.63.1–5

Later historical account · Dio’s description of Cicero as an accuser in the first trial needs comparison with Q. fr. 3.4.1–2 and 3.9.1, where Cicero denies taking the prosecution and describes himself as a witness.

ὁ δʼ οὖν δῆμος ὀλίγου μὲν καὶ τοὺς δικαστὰς ἀπέκτεινε, διαφυγόντων δὲ αὐτῶν ἐπετήρει τὰ λοιπὰ αὐτοῦ ἐγκλήματα, καὶ ἐποίησεν ἐπʼ ἐκείνοις

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0385.tlg001.perseus-grc2:39.63.1

γοῦν αὐτὸν ἁλῶναι. οἱ γὰρ λαχόντες περὶ αὐτῶν κρῖναι, τό τε πλῆθος ἅμα φοβηθέντες καὶ μηδὲν μέγα παρὰ τοῦ Γαβινίου εὑρόμενοι (ὡς γὰρ ἐπί τε βραχυτέροις εὐθυνόμενος καὶ προσδοκῶν καὶ τότε κρατήσειν οὐ πολλὰ ἐδαπάνησἐ κατεψηφίσαντο αὐτοῦ, καίτοι τοῦ τε Πομπηίου πλησίον ὄντος καὶ τοῦ Κικέρωνος συναγορεύοντος αὐτῷ.

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0385.tlg001.perseus-grc2:39.63.2

Edition apparatus
  • w(s *bk., o(\ L.
  • sunagoreu/ontos Xyl., a)goreu/ontos L.
ὁ γὰρ Πομπήιος κατὰ τὴν τοῦ σίτου πρόνοιαν, ἐπειδὴ πολὺς ὑπὸ τοῦ ποταμοῦ διέφθαρτο, ἐκδημήσας ὥρμησε μὲν ὡς καὶ ἐς τὸ πρότερον δικα- στήριον ἀπαντήσων (ἐν γὰρ τῇ Ἰταλίᾳ ἦνʼ, ὑστερήσας δὲ αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἀπεχώρησεν ἐκ τοῦ

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0385.tlg001.perseus-grc2:39.63.3

προαστείου πρὶν καὶ ἐκεῖνο τελεσθῆναι. καὶ μέντοι καὶ τοῦ δήμου ἔξω τοῦ πωμηρίου (τὴν γὰρ ἀρχὴν ἤδη τὴν τοῦ ἀνθυπάτου ἔχων οὐκ ἠδυνήθη ἐς τὴν πόλιν ἐσελθεῖνʼ ἀθροισθέντος πολλὰ ὑπὲρ τοῦ Γαβινίου ἐδημηγόρησε, καὶ γράμματά τέ τινα παρὰ τοῦ Καίσαρος πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ πεμφθέντα

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0385.tlg001.perseus-grc2:39.63.4

ἀνέγνω, καὶ τοὺς δικαστὰς ἱκέτευσε, τόν τε Κικέρωνα οὐχ ὅπως κατηγορῆσαι ἔτʼ αὐτοῦ ἐκώλυσεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὑπερδικῆσαι ἔπεισεν, ὥστε καὶ ἐκ τούτου τὸ τοῦ αὐτομόλου ἔγκλημα καὶ ὄνομα ἐπὶ πλεῖόν οἱ αὐξηθῆναι. οὐ μέντοι καὶ ὠφέλησέ τι τὸν Γαβίνιον, ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν ἔφυγεν ἁλούς, ὥσπερ εἶπον, ὕστερον δʼ ὑπὸ τοῦ Καίσαρος κατήχθη.

urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0385.tlg001.perseus-grc2:39.63.5

Edition apparatus
  • e)/peisen Reim., kai\ e)/peisen L.

Cassius Dio. Dio's Roman History, Vols. 3-6. Cary, Earnest, editor. London: William Heinemann; New York, NY: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1914-1917. · Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University; Cassius Dio. Dio's Roman History, Vols. 3-6. Cary, Earnest, editor. London: William Heinemann; New York, NY: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1914-1917. · CC BY-SA 4.0

Cicero, Q. fr. 3.9.1

Contemporary letter · Cicero’s role differs between the two Gabinius trials: a witness in this one, counsel for the defence in the later trial for repetundae. The Greek words and the punctuation are printed as in Purser’s edition.

de Gabinio nihil fuit faciendum istorum quae a te amantissime cogitata sunt. Τότε μοι χάνοι—! feci summa cum gravitate, ut omnes sentiunt, et summa cum lenitate quae feci. illum neque ursi neque levavi, testis vehemens fui, praeterea quievi. exitum iudici foedum et perniciosum levissime tuli; quod quidem bonum mihi nunc denique redundat, ut his malis rei publicae licentiaque audacium, qua ante rumpebar, nunc ne movear quidem. nihil est enim perditius his hominibus, his temporibus.

urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi058.perseus-lat1:3.9.1

Cicero. Ciceronis, M. Tullius. Epistulae, Vol. III. Purser, Louis Claude, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1901. · Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University; Cicero. Ciceronis, M. Tullius. Epistulae, Vol. III. Purser, Louis Claude, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1901. · CC BY-SA 4.0

Published reading

Andrew M. Riggsby, Roman Law and the Legal World of the Romans (Cambridge, 2010), p. 25.
Printed p. 25 checked directly against ; publisher bibliographic record checked, 2026-10-02. No full-book review claimed.
Distinguish the ancient institutions producing law from the evidence historians use to reconstruct them. This methodological distinction does not decide any of the particular cases in these routes.

Three speeches before Caesar · 在凯撒面前的三篇演说

Three openings before Caesar

Read by work and numbered section across the two readers. Only Pro Ligario has an assessed trial dossier here; the three speeches do not become three comparable trial outcomes.

Read the linked case or full-text context before the session; translations in existing readers may support access, but the original edition remains the citation control.

Learning outcomes

Session · 60 minutes

  1. Locate · 10 min — Read section 1 of Pro Marcello, Pro Ligario and Pro rege Deiotaro, then inspect their full readers.
  2. Compare · 20 min — Identify the speaker’s self-presentation, addressee and stated purpose in each opening.
  3. Argue · 20 min — Propose a comparison supported by all three openings. Mark what requires evidence from later sections.
  4. Review · 10 min — Check the citation chain and explain why these three texts are not three equivalent trial outcomes.

Assessment criteria

Extension: Select later sections to test whether the opening predicts the argument of the full speech. Record selection criteria before reading.

Cicero, Pro Marcello 1

Contemporary speech addressed to Caesar · A senatorial speech addressed to Caesar; praise and exhortation have a rhetorical occasion. Chapter alignment only; no sentence or word correspondence asserted.

diuturni silenti, patres conscripti, quo eram his temporibus usus, non timore aliquo, sed partim dolore, partim verecundia, finem hodiernus dies attulit, idemque initium quae vellem quaeque sentirem meo pristino more dicendi. tantam enim mansuetudinem, tam inusitatam inauditamque clementiam, tantum in summa potestate rerum omnium modum, tam denique incredibilem sapientiam ac paene divinam tacitus praeterire nullo modo possum.

urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi032.perseus-lat2:1

Edition apparatus
  • invisitatam Eberhard
  • nullo modo praet. β

Cicero. M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes, Vol. 6. Clark, Albert Curtis, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1918. · Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University; Cicero. M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes, Vol. 6. Clark, Albert Curtis, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1918. · CC BY-SA 4.0

Cicero, Pro Ligario 1

Contemporary speech addressed to Caesar · An advocacy speech before Caesar; its clemency language is partisan argument. Chapter alignment only; no sentence or word correspondence asserted.

novum crimen, C. Caesar, et ante hunc diem non auditum propinquus meus ad te Q. Tubero detulit, Q. Ligarium in Africa fuisse, idque C. Pansa, praestanti vir ingenio, fretus fortasse familiaritate ea quae est ei tecum ausus est confiteri. itaque quo me vertam nescio. paratus enim veneram, cum tu id neque per te scires neque audire aliunde potuisses, ut ignoratione tua ad hominis miseri salutem abuterer. sed quoniam diligentia inimici investigatum est quod latebat, confitendum est, opinor, praesertim cum meus necessarius Pansa fecerit ut id integrum iam non esset, omissaque controversia omnis oratio ad misericordiam tuam conferenda est, qua plurimi sunt conservati, cum a te non liberationem culpae, sed errati veniam impetravissent.

urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi033.perseus-lat2:1

Edition apparatus
  • hanc Quintil. xi. 3. 108, 110
  • non auditum αBDL et Quintil.: in auditum Eγ et Aquila Rom. Rhet. L. p. 24
  • scires βa: scire αhm
  • abuterer mallem uterer (numeri gratia) sed vulg tuetur Quintil.
  • opinor α: ut opinor βγ

Cicero. M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes, Vol. 6. Clark, Albert Curtis, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1918. · Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University; Cicero. M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes, Vol. 6. Clark, Albert Curtis, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1918. · CC BY-SA 4.0

Cicero, Pro Rege Deiotaro 1

Contemporary speech addressed to Caesar · An advocacy speech delivered before Caesar in his house; accusation and rebuttal are not adjudicated facts. Chapter alignment only; no sentence or word correspondence asserted.

cum in omnibus causis gravioribus, C. Caesar, initio dicendi commoveri soleam vehementius quam videtur vel usus vel aetas mea postulare, tum in hac causa ita multa me perturbant ut, quantum mea fides studi mihi adferat ad salutem regis Deiotari defendendam, tantum facultatis timor detrahat. primum dico pro capite fortunisque regis, quod ipsum, etsi non iniquum est in tuo dumtaxat periculo, tamen est ita inusitatum, regem reum capitis esse, ut ante hoc tempus non sit auditum.

urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi034.perseus-lat2:1

Edition apparatus
  • multa me α, Prisc. K. iii. p. 369: me multa βγ
  • regis Deiotari γ
  • etsi αβa: si gh

Cicero. M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes, Vol. 6. Clark, Albert Curtis, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1918. · Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University; Cicero. M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes, Vol. 6. Clark, Albert Curtis, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1918. · CC BY-SA 4.0

Published reading

Christopher Francese (ed.), Caesar: Gallic War Selections, Dickinson College Commentaries.
Project introduction and editorial policy checked online, 2026-10-02; not a complete commentary review.
Reading support and a model for separating notes, vocabulary and editorial choices. Its text generally follows DuPontet with declared changes; it must not silently replace this site’s Holmes edition.

Robert Morstein-Marx, Julius Caesar and the Roman People (Cambridge, 2021), chapter 8, “Caesar’s Leniency”.
Publisher chapter summary checked online, 2026-10-02; full chapter not reviewed in this source check.
A competing interpretation of leniency for further reading. The publisher summary questions simple models of permanent subordination after pardon; test the argument against its full evidence before adopting it.

Andrew M. Riggsby, Roman Law and the Legal World of the Romans (Cambridge, 2010), p. 25.
Printed p. 25 checked directly against ; publisher bibliographic record checked, 2026-10-02. No full-book review claimed.
Distinguish the ancient institutions producing law from the evidence historians use to reconstruct them. This methodological distinction does not decide any of the particular cases in these routes.