Public Standing Courts!

I am a silly little Canadian teen who has had a special interest in ancient Rome for a few years now. I am currently obsessed with ancient Roman courtroom antics but I also enjoy learning about late Roman republican politics and retrospective diagnoses in the Julio-Claudian dynasty.

I am an IB student (pisses myself and passes out).

I want to make a youtube channel to talk about these things and I'm working on my first video. Fingers crossed that I'll manage to finish it!

I'm also an artist.

History gets dark sometimes and I'll probably have posts about poison, death, assassinations, incest, as well as a whole host of other things that can be found in the Roman sources.

It was crucial for Cicero to have been a post-Sullan lawyer. Not pre-Sullan, not post-Caesar, but specifically in the time period of around 81 BCE to 49 BCE. Before this time period, and it would've been hard for someone like Cicero, a new man, to have broken into the ranks of lawyers (who mostly belonged to old families) and there were also quite a lot of them, so it would've just been hard for him to get his foot in the door. As well, it seems to have been less conducive of a time for the law to help with one's political career, possibly.

If he was from after this time period, such as the principate, the justice system had changed and it just wasn't a good place for a Cicero. Roman lawyers of the later time periods all say that Cicero couldn't have handled this time period, since the super long speeches (as well as allowing the lawyers to do whatever they wanted) was part of an older time.

The most important thing about him is how old he was around 81 BCE, aka when the justice system started working again. Right before this, a large amount of lawyers either got murdered or decided to retire. And so, at 81 BCE, the field was pretty sparce, and perfect for someone like Cicero to get their foot in the door.

And so, the trial of Roscius, the first murder trial in years, was the perfect opportunity for Cicero to make a name for himself. It wasn't actually his first case (it was his first criminal case) and in my opinion, its importance in society as a whole has been exaggerated (although it was SUPER important for Cicero) and I am not exactly sure about what I'm saying; honestly I am just yapping for the sake of yapping. But what I want to say is that so much of Cicero's success came from being born at the time he was.

For example, Hortensius was born eight years earlier, and because of that, he got to start a short but glorious legal career right before the social war ruined everything and he was drafted. He came back once things went back to normal, but he could've had a much better career if only it hadn't been cut down so early.

If I had a nickel for every time a quote from the Pro Milone has been misinterpreted and then become influential, I'd have two nickles...

Silent enim leges inter arma.

(I hope I got the word order right.)

From the Pro Milone, it is most commonly translated as "in times of war, the laws fall silent." It has been used as a justification to take away civil rights during wartime

"these [amendments of the Bill of Rights], in truth, are all peace provisions of the Constitution and, like all other conventional and legislative laws and enactments, are silent amidst arms, and when the safety of the people becomes the supreme law."

and has been frequently criticized by advocates of international law and the punishment of war crimes. But what if I told you that the original quote has little to do with war and little to do with ignoring laws?

Here's the original context, from Pro Milone 10 to 11.

I mean, that, should our life have fallen into any snare, into the violence and the weapons of robbers or foes, every method of winning a way to safety would be morally justifiable. When arms speak, the laws are silent ; they bid none to await their word, since he who chooses to await it must pay an undeserved penalty ere he can exact a deserved one.

Here, Cicero is talking about self defense. And what he says after that famous quote is very important. It'd be unjust if a victim of a violent attack would be forced to wait until the law could deal with it. If someone is trying to murder you, it doesn't matter that murder is illegal, since you are actively being attacked and the law might as well be silent. Therefore, to wait for the law would be to allow yourself to get murdered in the hopes that maybe the murderer would be convicted later on. However, even though the law would prefer if you didn't kill people, self defense (even through lethal force) is justified because the law cannot help you until after the fact. In fact, self defense is legal under Roman law, and according to Cicero, is naturally learned by everyone. It's not necessarily that, if times are tough and people are attacking you, you are allowed to break the law, but that if your life is actively in danger, the law is not going to become a deus ex machina and rescue you, and so it's alright to do whatever you can to keep yourself safe.

This is not a justification of breaking the law, but a description of its limitations. The law can only deal with crime after the fact, but someone whose life is in danger need not wait until then.