49

Steve Jenkin

November 2, 2014

¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 49: SUMMING UP

¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 § 49 concludes Cicero’s discussion of the war (§§ 6-26) and the choice of general (§§ 27-49), which involved him in outlining the ideal of the perfect military commander and demonstrating that Pompey is its living embodiment. As such, the paragraph systematically revisits the main themes of the argument.

¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 Quare cum et bellum sit ita necessarium, ut neglegi non possit, ita magnum, ut accuratissime sit administrandum, et cum ei imperatorem praeficere possitis, in quo sit eximia belli scientia, singularis virtus, clarissima auctoritas, egregia fortuna, dubitatis Quirites, quin hoc tantum boni, quod vobis ab dis immortalibus oblatum et datum est, in rem publicam conservandam atque amplificandam conferatis?: This paragraph consists of one long sentence. It begins with an extensive cum-clause that contains within itself three further subordinate clauses: two ut-clauses and a relative clause (in quo…). The main verb is dubitatis, which sets up the concluding quin-clause, within which we get a further relative clause (quod…).

¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 In the opening cum-clauses (Quare cum… egregia fortuna…) Cicero looks back to the tripartite argument he announced in § 6:

¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 primum mihi videtur de genere belli, deinde de magnitudine, tum de imperatore deligendo esse dicendum.

¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 He reiterated the blueprint at the beginning of the section devoted to the choice of imperator (§ 27):

¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 Satis mihi multa verba fecisse videor, qua re esset hoc bellum genere ipso necessarium, magnitudine periculosum. Restat ut de imperatore ad id bellum deligendo ac tantis rebus praeficiendo dicendum esse videatur.

¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 The design of the cum-clauses in § 49 mirrors the design of § 27: in both cases, Cicero groups together the first two items to do with the war and sets apart the choice of general as the climactic third topic to be treated. The first cum– clause covers the type and magnitude of the war, the second the appointment of the commander-in-chief:

¶ 9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0  

¶ 10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0  

¶ 11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 Cicero enhances the immediacy and vividness of his discourse by shifting from the impersonal passive constructions in the ut-clauses (neglegi non possit; sit administrandum) to a direct address of the audience in (ii): praeficere possitis. This shift generates a chiasmus of sorts: in (i) the verb in the cum– clause is esse, stating a fact, whereas the verbs in the ut-clauses indicate the action to be taken; in (ii) the verb in the cum-clause indicates the action to be taken and the verb in the subsequent relative clause (in quo) is esse, stating a fact.

¶ 12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 0 § 49 also sums up the section on the perfect general, harking back to § 28 in particular. Compare:

¶ 13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0 § 28 (the ideal): Ego enim sic existimo, in summo imperatore quattuor has res inesse oportere: scientiam rei militaris, virtutem, auctoritatem, felicitatem.

¶ 14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 with

¶ 15 Leave a comment on paragraph 15 0 § 49 (its incarnation): imperatorem …, in quo sit eximia belli scientia, singularis virtus, clarissima auctoritas, egregia fortuna

¶ 16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0  

¶ 17 Leave a comment on paragraph 17 0 The following table shows how Cicero reiterates key words in those paragraphs that flag up the structure of his discourse. If § 6 introduces the main themes and functions almost like a table of contents, §§ 27, 28, 49 offer repetitions, variations, and elaborations:

¶ 18 Leave a comment on paragraph 18 0  

¶ 26 Leave a comment on paragraph 26 0  

¶ 27 Leave a comment on paragraph 27 0 Note in particular how the notional perfect general of § 28 has become a flesh-and-blood exemplar in § 49 – indeed, how Pompey outdoes the theoretical specimen Cicero delineated in § 28. At the outset, he simply specified the four qualities that ought to be present in the summus imperator; by § 49 we have learned that Pompey possesses these four qualities not only in abundance, but to a unique degree: the four nouns scientia, virtus, auctoritas and felicitas/fortuna recur with reference to Pompey, each preceded by a panegyric attribute: eximia, singularis, clarissima, egregia.

¶ 28 Leave a comment on paragraph 28 0 cum et bellum sit ita necessarium, ut neglegi non possit, [sc. bellum sit] ita magnum, ut accuratissime sit administrandum, et cum…: both ut-clauses are consecutive, set up by a preceding ita. The subject throughout (of sit, possit, and sit administrandum) is bellum. The anaphora (ita… ita…), the asyndeton (the two parts of the cum-clause follow on each other without connectives), and the ellipsis of bellum sit before magnum generates a sense of urgency, perhaps even impatience: by now Cicero has set out the indisputable facts of the matter – there is now no reason to hesitate further. Note, though, that Cicero uses connectives to coordinate the two cum-clauses: cum et … et cum.

¶ 29 Leave a comment on paragraph 29 0 et cum ei imperatorem praeficere possitis: the demonstrative pronoun ei (in the neuter dative singular ) harks back to bellum. praeficere here takes both an accusative object (imperatorem) and a dative object (ei). The idiom is: ‘to put the accusative in charge of the dative’.

¶ 30 Leave a comment on paragraph 30 0 in quo sit eximia belli scientia, singularis virtus, clarissima auctoritas, egregia fortuna: in quo introduces a relative clause of characteristics, hence the subjunctive (sit). By pulling the verb up front, Cicero clears space for the powerful, asyndetic enumeration of the four key qualities of his perfect general, all endowed with an amplifying attribute.

¶ 31 Leave a comment on paragraph 31 0 dubitatis, Quirites, quin…: one would expect an infinitive here, rather than a quin-clause (which is the regular construction with negated expressions of doubt).

¶ 32 Leave a comment on paragraph 32 0 quin hoc tantum boni, quod vobis ab dis immortalibus oblatum et datum est, in rem publicam conservandam atque amplificandam conferatis?: Cicero here casts his audience as the lucky recipients of divine favour – and challenges them to make the most of the windfall that is Pompey, for the greater good of the commonwealth. There is a notional chain from the gods to the res publica, via Pompey and the Roman citizens: the gods (ab dis immortalibus) gift the citizens (vobis) with Pompey (who hides behind the abstract formulation hoc tantum boni), whom they in turn should not hesitate to utilize for public service (in rem publicam conservandam atque amplificandam). The one who is rhetorically in charge of the sequence di immortales > Pompey > Quirites > res publica is of course Cicero; those who get sidelined in this sequence are all the other members of Rome’s senatorial elite, which was technically in charge of handling all interactions with the divine sphere of political relevance in republican times.

¶ 33 Leave a comment on paragraph 33 0 hoc tantum boni: hoc tantum is the subject of the quin-clause and the antecedent of quod. boni is a partitive genitive dependent on tantum: ‘so much of a boon’.

¶ 34 Leave a comment on paragraph 34 0