Selected Works

by Marcus Tullius Cicero, Michael Grant (Translator)

• Introduction by Michael Grant
• Against Verres, I
• twenty-three letters
• The Second Philippic Against Antony
• On Duties, III
• On Old Age
• Appendices inc. maps, genealogy, definitions.

First published 1960; reprinted w/revisions 1965; reprinted w/additional revisions 1971.

Genres: Philosophy, Classics, History, Nonfiction, Politics, Ancient, Ancient History

272 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 44

About the author

Born 3 January 106 BC, Arpinum, Italy
Died 7 December 43 BC (aged 63), Formia, Italy

Marcus Tullius Cicero was a Roman philosopher, statesman, lawyer, political theorist, and Roman constitutionalist. Cicero is widely considered one of Rome's greatest orators and prose stylists.

Alternate profiles:
Cicéron
Marco Tullio Cicerone
Cicerone

Note: All editions should have Marcus Tullius Cicero as primary author. Editions with another name on the cover should have that name added as secondary author.

Reviews

[Glenn Russell · Rating 5 out of 5]

Selected Works - A collection of classic writings of the great Roman orator/statesman/philosopher Cicero, an excellent book for anyone approaching his work for the first time. Not only are there selections from Cicero’s writings on politics, moral philosophy and old age but there is a superb thirty page introduction written by Michael Grant. Thank you, Penguin and thank you, Michael Grant! To provide a little Roman rasa, below are several quotes from the book along with my comments.

From Michael Grant’s Introduction
“Cicero was not often a very successful politician, but he derives unmistakable greatness from his insistence, against odds, that such dictatorial rulers were in the wrong because they unjustifiably curtailed the freedom of the individual; whereas the ultimate authority should be not themselves but certain unchangeable moral principles.” -------- Anybody who picks up a newspaper anywhere in the world will recognize immediately how Cicero’s writings are as relevant today as they were in ancient Rome. Matter of fact, with our omnipresent multinational corporations added to the political mix, perhaps even more relevant.

“Cicero’s task was not an easy one; the Greek philosophers, to which with the added infusion of his own personality, he gave eloquent expression – far more eloquent than that of their original authors – contain much that was complicated and difficult, especially to unphilosophical Romans." ---------- Cicero’s achievement strikes home for me personally, living as I do in the unphilosophical Rome of the modern world: America. We should never take for granted we have access to the writings of ancient philosophers presented in well-crafted and clearly presented books such as this one.

“The moral emphasis of Stoicism (when its dogma was toned down) was very acceptable to him, and indeed the basis of a great deal of his thought and feelings on moral and ethical problems." ---------- Michael Grant provides an easy-to-read short overview of how Cicero drew from not only Stoicism but many streams of Greek philosophy, such as the Pythagoreans, Platonists, Peripatetics (followers of Aristotle) and two schools Cicero particularly despised: the Cyrenaics (immediate happiness is the ultimate good) and the Epicureans (the philosophical school that shunned pubic life). Such lively and informative readings makes for a real treat.

From Against Verres
“One thing, then, that has influenced me is this gloating of yours over your tyrannical dominance in our courts; and another is the evident existence of men who feel not the slightest shame or disgust for their repulsive and outrageous behavior.” --------- In the world of Roman opulence and excess, Cicero could tell it like it is.

From On Duties
“Once I lived with great crowds around me, in the forefront of Roman publicity. But now I shun the sight of the scoundrels who swarm on every side. I withdraw as completely as I can; and I am often alone. However, as the philosophers instruct, one must not only choose the least among evils, one must extract from them any good that they may contain.” --------- This is a lesson we can all learn from: make the best of a less than ideal situation. “

“Another objection urges that one ought to take account of compatriots but not of foreigners. But people who put forward these arguments subvert the whole foundation of the human community – and its removal means the annihilation of all kindness, generosity, goodness, and justice.” ------- Cicero’s words have a modern ring, as if he anticipated our 21st century world-wide culture and society.

From: On Old Age
“An actor need not remain on the stage until the very end of the play: if he wins applause in those acts in which he appears, he will have done well enough. In life, too, a man can perform his part wisely without staying on the stage until the play is finished. However short your life may be, it will still be long enough to live honestly and decently.” --------- This is but one of the many gold nuggets of ancient wisdom a reader will find in Cicero’s essay.

[Gabrielle (Reading Rampage) · Rating 4 out of 5]

I knew I'd love Cicero long before I picked up this book. I knew I would because he was a guy who thought a house should be full of books, because he thought human beings were honor-bound to take care of each other and because his brain basically never stopped churning out interesting things! What I had not realized was that a lot of his writing (especially his work on ethics) is still very relevant today. It's something that never fails to astonish me with ancient philosophers; their timelessness. Cicero's writing is particularly fascinating because a lot of his surviving correspondence was not work he'd ever meant for publication, and it captures a remarkably tumultuous period of history with a lot of candor, and it is very revealing of his true personality, and not simply his public persona. I have always found that the major historical actors of Antiquity to have incredible, larger-than-life personalities and incredibly sharp deliveries: sure, maybe Caesar was making himself sound smarter than he was, and maybe Plutarch and Herodotus were adding attitude for the enjoyment of their readers, but you can believe Cicero's wit to have been one of the most brilliant of the era, as his scribe preserved a huge quantity of his writing, from the very public to the very private (the snippets we still have about how he grieved for his daughter simply gutted me).

This collection contains a speech against Verres (a corruption case Cicero worked on), a large section of commented correspondence, the second Philippic against Anthony (Cicero's call on the senate to move against Marc Antony and side with Octavian), and the essays "On Duties" and "On Old Age". While the introduction gives you a decent context, if you are brand new to Ancient Roman history, it's easy to get lost in the convoluted network of alliances and sometimes abrupt changes in allegiances everyone went through; maybe Plutarch's "Roman Lives" is a better place to start for absolute newbies, or Dan Carlin's excellent "Hardcore History" podcast (the episode "Death Throes of the Republic" is amazing: https://www.dancarlin.com/product/har...).

What I am constantly amazed with (often to the point where I am laughing out loud with delight) is the panache with which Cicero eviscerated (in writing; he was known as a physical coward) people he didn't like. There was no love lost between him and Mark Antony, obviously, but DAMN! This book is worth reading if only for the pleasure of finding out how many different ways Cicero can accuse Antony of being a disgusting lech. He was the greatest orator of his day, so his eloquence is not a surprise, just an absolute treat to read.

The chapter “On Duty” is a fascinating essay about the moral obligations Cicero believed every man ought to respect in order to live a good life. His humanist stance – that dishonesty is the highest moral crime and that no man should profit from another’s lost – can sound idealistic, but it echoes this book’s first chapter, where he railed against corruption. He felt very strongly that goodwill and care of one’s fellow man was key to keeping an equitable social order. I have to say, I know quite a few people in business and politics who could probably benefit from reading this…

The final section, “On Old Age”, was equally interesting: the fear of aging is obviously not new, and the Romans were as superficial as we are when it came to their physical appearances. It’s a rather optimistic text, that glosses over some of the inevitable physiological decay (Cicero wasn't interested in physical prowess, whether it was fighting capacities or sex, so he didn't think anyone would miss that too much...), but it's nevertheless full of advice that could still be followed today about one's attitude in regards to aging, and how to enjoy the stage of one's life more fully.

This is the sort of book I wish everyone would read at least once; I know that's not a realistic expectation, but that won't stop me from recommending it to everyone.

[William2 · Rating 4 out of 5]

The opening piece is Cicero's 70 BC courtroom statement in prosecution of one Gaius Verres, Roman governor of Sicily, whose corruption takes the breath away. I read everything except the "Second Philippic Against Antony," which I found too chockablock with the political minutia of the day.

The selection of letters is interesting, too, primarily because translator Michael Grant adds sections of connective background. "On Old Age," which Michel de Montagine said gave him "an appetite for growing old." Who said the old count didn't have a sense of humor?

One forgets at times that one is reading an ancient document. Especially when Cicero talks about the moral questions involved in selling, say, real estate, wine, horses, etc. What honest disclosures should be made about these items in advance? But then he turns to the selling of slaves, asking which is the morally right seller's position?

"And then, if a man knows that the wine he sells is going bad, ought he to disclose the fact? Diogenes says he need not, Antipater thinks an honest man should. The Stoics discuss problems of this kind like disputed points of law. Again, 'when you are selling a slave ought his defects to be declared - not only those which there is a legal obligation to declare (otherwise the transaction is liable to be cancelled), but also the fact that he is a liar or gambler or thief or inebriate?' One of the philosophers maintains that you ought to declare such facts, the other says you need not." (p. 195)

Alas, "On Old Age" is filled with the usual platitudes. Here, perhaps more than anywhere, one feels the gap between those pagan times and our own less certain age. The part about working for one's immortality though still rings true.

"You cannot suppose that I should have worked so hard, day and night, in war and peace alike, if I had believed that my fame would not outlast my life. . . Somehow my soul seemed to understand that its true life would only begin after my death: alertly, unceasingly, it fastened its gaze upon the generations to come. The souls of our finest men engage in this pursuit of immortal fame - and they would not feel this urge unless immortality were really in store for them." (p. 246)

[Diamond Cowboy · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an awesome book of letters mainly damning the use of tirany. I will give a full review at a later date.

[Greg · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have students who know more about Rome than I do, and considering that my students only come up to my knees, I am hardly someone to listen to about Rome. That said, I don't think it could do a great deal of harm for more Americans to learn about the life of a man who died trying to defend his Republic against the tide of Empire.

Sure this collection has its boring moments, but Michael Grant does his best to piece together a portrait of Cicero's life and career without inflicting too much pain on the reader; Grant's intermittent commentary guides us nicely from selection to selection, and the rest all comes from Cicero himself. The Renaissance loved Cicero for his civic commitment and rhetorical genius, and we are in many ways the heirs of the Renaissance's affection for rhetoric, so it's perhaps worth checking out where they developed that fondness.

Apart from that, there are lessons to be found in reading Cicero. The guy was hardly perfect, and he lost about as badly as a person can lose, and yet we still admire him. I always keep Cicero in mind when things don't go my way (unfortunately, Cicero is on my mind almost constantly...).

[Roy Lotz · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is strangely alluring to contemplate this iconic figure of the ancient world, whose name seems to crop up in every corner of the Western canon. I've seen references to Cicero in works ranging from St. Augustine to James Joyce. His influence on the Western Mind has been profound—according to Michael Grant, incalculable. In terms of politics, philosophy, or prose, Cicero is inescapable.

In fact, I’ve often been given the impression that education used to almost entirely consist of memorizing lines of Cicero in Latin, since his prose was the model of excellence for well over a thousand years. His championing of democracy can be easily interpreted as a presage to modern values; and his belles-lettres are foundational to the Western traditions of education and humanism. One hundred years or so ago, to admit that one hadn’t read Cicero (in the original Latin) was equivalent to admitting that one was an ignoramus. Not anymore. (Or you can call me an ignoramus.)

So, for me at least, stumbling upon Cicero in the 21st century feels strangely akin to what Petrarch must have felt when he ‘discovered’ Cicero’s letters. It is the joy of discovering both a new and charming writer, and of discovering that you yourself are a part of the tradition shaped by this man. It makes you want to start working on your Latin and writing Philippics (not that I’m going to do either any time soon).

What’s also fascinating about Cicero is how obviously flawed a man he was. He was a skilled orator and lawyer, but a mediocre politician; he was a skilled writer, but a mediocre philosopher. (In fact, I can hardly call On Duties a philosophical work at all, so completely does it refrain from theoretical investigation.) Intelligent, yes; eloquent, yes; admirable, perhaps; but heroic he was not. I don’t wish to sound insulting to the man—his positive attributes clearly outweighed his negative ones—but I only wish to point out the strangeness that such an obviously limited man could exert such an unlimited influence.

I highly recommend using this edition (the Penguin edition) to get to know this bygone sage. Michael Grant’s introductory and explanatory notes are well-written and often necessary to fully understand what’s going on. Also, his selection from Cicero’s writings succeeds in showing the many facets of Cicero’s activity, from the political to the personal to the philosophical. And heck, if enough people read him, maybe we’ll have another Renaissance on our hands—who knows?

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

I just reread this book. There is something that attracts me to Cicero and his interpretation of the world. In particular the sections on duties and old age which I have suddenly reached.

I knew very little about Cicero until I read this book. The introduction is excellent followed by three parts including speeches and essays he wrote. Against Verres is a speech he made against the dangers of tyranny. The essays from On Duties and On Old Age are excellent. One thing I did learn was that Antony was a nasty piece of work although Cicero may have been a bit bias in his hatred of him.

Cicero was and still is influential today. In Roman times he was unsuccessful in stopping the Republic being replaced by a dictatorship but he did stick to his guns. Ultimately his disparagement of Antony resulted in his murder. However, his brave if futile defense of the Republic institutions from authoritarian rule was something he knew was dangerous. Stoically he stayed true to his ethics.

Reading the essay on Old age is as relevant today as then with sections on the pleasures of age, activities for the old, consolations for lost strength and where is deaths sting. I liked the quote ‘...the mind and spirit need even more attention than the body, for old age easily extinguishes them, like lamps when they are not given oil’.

On Duties also gives a practical code for living with arguments of the unnaturalness of doing wrong and making difficult moral decisions. It is a moral code to avoid tyranny and the benefits of human cooperation tempered with good sense.

If you are new to Cicero then this book is an excellent introduction to him. A remarkable man even with his faults.

[M. Chéwl · Rating 4 out of 5]

This compendium of Cicero’s selected works was a fairly rewarding read overall; albeit a little hit-and-miss in parts. The ‘Correspondence’ chapter was on the dull side. Where Cicero shines is in his invectives against Verres and in the ‘Second Phillipic Against Mark Antony’; a facetiously ascribed title in reference to the 4th century BC orator Demosthenes, who in his speeches vehemently decried King Phillip II of Macedon.

The Second Phillipic is an entertaining cocktail of acid-tongued vitriol; an eloquently delivered character assassination if ever there was one.
Here, Cicero unravels the litany of Antony’s crimes against the Republic and the people of Rome: duplicitous political machinations, treachery, bribery - transgressions of duty and morality ad infinitum. He describes Antony as a debauched, vainglorious, “drink-sodden, sex-ridden wreck” with monstrous effrontery (I must remember these insults for future disagreements; however, the last time I was that direct, Grandma never spoke to me again....)

According to Cicero, when Antony wasn’t marauding foreign lands and inciting civil war, he was something of an inveterate gambler. He acquired the mansion of deceased noblemen Marcus Varro and thoroughly desecrated it overnight; turning it into a den of iniquity replete with prostitutes and drunkards.

Cicero leaves little room for ambiguity on his feelings as to how the senate should deal with Antony in the following chapter ‘On Duties’: “The whole sinful and pestilential gang of dictatorial rulers ought to be cast out from human society. For when limbs have lost their life blood and vital energy, their amputation may well follow. That is precisely how these ferocious, bestial monsters in human form ought to be severed from the body of mankind.” I couldn’t help but think how aptly this sentiment applies to most politicians today.

Alas, the tyrant Antony demonstrated in Cicero’s case, an instance whereby the sword was mightier than the pen. Having gained the approval of his co-triumvirate ruler Octavian, Antony had Cicero put to death.

The final chapter ‘On Old Age’ is a philosophical musing heavily reminiscent of Plato’s Republic. Instead of employing the protagonist Socrates, Cicero chooses Cato the Elder and interlocutors Scipio and Laelius for the dialectic, whom collectively tease out the pleasures of age. The salient benefit of age according to Cicero is an increasing disinterest in sensual pleasures of the flesh. Here again, Cicero’s views are heavily imbued with Platonism and perhaps later influenced St. Augustine of Hippo in his Confessions whereby he laments, “God make me chaste!! .....but not just yet”.

Cicero claims it to be asinine for a man once in possession of physical strength and vigour to bemoan the inevitable atrophy of the body. Instead, he must cultivate his cerebral qualities and look to become mentally robust and prolific in his scholarly work until his dying day.

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 4 out of 5]

The selection of these works goes in order of ascending quality. His “Against Verres” is an early snapshot of his rhetorical career. His letters, while often whining in tone, are a remarkable glimpse into late Roman Republican life. The real quality, however, are the two final works, “On Duties” and “On Old Age.”

“On Duties” is that work that college students should read in their ethics classes. At my liberal arts college, ethics meant simply reading about “hard decisions” and then justifying which decision best fit with late modernity’s loose sexual mores. Cicero, by contrast, actually helps you think through the problem.

Here is the problem: given that the Good exists, what do we do when what is good conflicts with what is advantageous? Cicero’s answer is that any disagreement is only apparent, since nature and goodness cannot be at variance.

As a Stoic, his argument is that there “can be no advantage in what is not right” (III.II.8). He then runs this template through several test cases. He defends property rights because violating these would cause the collapse of the human community, “the brotherhood of man.” This is the natural law, or nature’s rational principle.

Case study 1: Can a starving man take food from someone who was completely useless? Robbery is unnatural, but if the case were such that your robbery rendered benefit to the community of men, then it isn’t wrong provided it is done for that reason. Nature’s law coincides with the common interest, and the common interest ordains that the means of subsistence be transferred to the starving.

Case study 2: Can you steal from a tyrant? Cicero’s answer is chillingly simple: there is nothing wrong in stealing from a man whom it is morally just to kill.

Another reason that the morally right cannot conflict with the advantageous is that doing wrong damages one’s soul. Wrongdoing leads to personal degradation.

There are other case studies dealing with insider trading, etc. Cicero’s conclusion is balanced: “Holding [knowledge] back doesn’t always amount to concealment; but it does when you want people, for your own profit, to be kept in the dark about something which you know and would be useful for them to know” (180).

Why? Nature is the source of law, and it is contrary to nature for one man to prey upon another’s ignorance.

Later he defines the four cardinal virtues as subdivisions of right.

On Old Age

This is a rather charming treatise on how to live out your older years. Cicero developed his memory by reciting everything he had learned each day.

His comments on the after-life, while wrong, are interesting in what educated Romans would have believed. He argues that our souls came from heaven, and the earthy is alien to their divine nature (214). The soul functions at lightning speed

Conclusion

Even in translation, and even when I disagree with him, Cicero wrote with an easy calm. I especially recommend his “On Duties” to every college student.

[Callum's Column · Rating 4 out of 5]

Oratorically, philosophically, and politically, Cicero was one of the great men of the Roman Republic. Whether facing Catiline or Caesar, Cicero stood up for liberty and republicanism. He paid the ultimate price when he was murdered by Antony in the civil war that proceeded the Ides of March. Despite his death, Cicero was respected by his contemporaries. Augustus, for example, posthumously praised him despite holding antithetical views to Cicero's dispositions. Cicero's writings also influenced thinkers like Locke, Montesquieu and America's Founding Fathers. Thus, Cicero's death was not in vain; his republican virtue buttressed modern liberty.

Alongside an introduction by Michael Grant, Selected Works includes speeches and essays, such as Against Varres, I; The Second Philippic Against Antony; On Duties, III; On Old Age; and dozens of private letters. His political-philosophical magnum opuses are not included--i.e., The Republic, and The Laws. Nonetheless, Cicero's political philosophy remains imbued throughout. The value of this volume is augmented with additional historical information that contextualises Cicero's work, and provides a quasi-biography of Cicero's life. The Second Philippic Against Antony may be one of the great polemics of all time.

Few can match the genius of Cicero. Nonetheless, one can, and ought to, strive to reach his virtue, particularly in contemporary America. Many Trumpian sycophants support his anti-republican ambitions. Axios reports Byron Donalds (R-Fla) as a Veep contender for Trump. He has already stated that he would be willing to decline certification of the 2028 presidential elections if a Democrat were to succeed a Trump second term (Trump and his supporters attempted to pressure Pence to do this on January 6). Modern America is not analogous to Ancient Rome. Nonetheless, the survival of extant institutions requires Ciceronian virtue.

[Gary · Rating 5 out of 5]

Marcus Tullius Cicero was not modest. Marcus Tullius Cicero was ambitious. Marcus Tullius Cicero was hardworking and doggedly determined. Marcus Tullius Cicero in old age became wise.

For me, these are fresh takeaways from reading Selected Works of Cicero. The excerpts chosen by the editor for this volume include sections of his vitriolic orations against Veres, against Catiline, and against Mark Anthony. Also included are speeches made in the Roman law courts, and selections from his correspondence including some from shortly before and after Caesar’s assassination. The first book of On Duty, perhaps Cicero’s most influential work over time, is also found here.

His orations against Verres, Catiline, and Mark Antony are, to say the least, vitriolic and earned him lifelong enemies. In fact, his harangues made of Anthony a bitter foe who eventually brought about Cicero’s violent death. Whether prosecuting or defending in the courts or in the Senate, Cicero was a lawyer. Under the home-spun almost folksy veneer of his orations lay well-prepared, cogent, and persuasive arguments. He saw himself first and foremost as an eloquent and effective orator for his clients and for the Republic, something he worked at diligently and which bought him the honor and glory he so much wanted. Not being a military man this was singularly difficult in Rome where military success was honored most. I should add that I found his single-minded grasping after honor and glory off-putting, even though this same passion for glory was integral to the Republic.

As for his letters, scholars agree that he never edited or intended them for publication so they offer a more unvarnished view of the man than his polished speeches and writings. Born an Equestrian, through his own tireless effort, great talents, and overweening ambition, Cicero rose to membership in the Senate and later to Consul as a novus homo (new man). He was always aware that he was not a born Patrician and set out to be more of a Patrician than the Patricians themselves. His greatest accomplishment, he writes, was saving the Roman Republic from an insurrection plot fomented by Catiline. In his letters we read that he felt he deserved greater recognition for this, indeed far more praise than he received. He believed he deserved, and he longed for, a Triumph but was never to be so-honored and there is a bitterness in his letters about this. The correspondence also shows him trying to play king-maker before and during the civil wars: he was against Julius Caesar before he was for him; later, as the senior man in the Senate he actively supported Octavian as a counterweight to Anthony.

Beyond being an outstanding orator and politician, Cicero was also a statesman, a scholar, and a distinguished writer who is admired as a stylist still today. This shows most clearly in the long selection from On Duty included in this volume. Written late in life, On Duty is ostensibly written to his son as a guide to living a good life in the moral sense. More broadly its subject is ethics according to Stoic principles, but Cicero incorporates his own experience and mature perspective. On Duty deeply resonated with me; Cicero, it seemed to me, was a truly wise man. Was that because I found new “truths” in the work, or was it because I was brought up in and live in a culture profoundly influenced by Ciceronian ethics? In fact, the Fathers of the Church, including St. Jerome and St. Augustine, turned to Cicero’s later writings and On Duty in particular as a source of inspiration for what it meant to live a moral Christian life. The golden rule may be the centerpiece of New Testament ethical teaching, but for situations the Church Fathers referred to Cicero (and Seneca). It is telling that every well-educated European man from the late middle ages through the early 19th century read the Bible in Greek or Latin, and On Duty in Latin. The first book printed on Johannes Gutenberg’s press in the 15th century was the Bible, the second a book of hymns, and the third, On Duty. In the 18th century the Founding Fathers of the United States established what was a Ciceronian republic. The principles and ideas in Cicero’s later writings are embedded in Western civilization so deeply that they are in the very air we breath. The ambitious Cicero, the man who so desperately wanted to be remembered for generations, ultimately succeeded even though not known by name to most today.

What makes Cicero so interesting is that he wrote prolifically and so many of his works are extant that it’s possible to follow his thinking over time. The flood of vitriol in the early works is far removed from his concern about other people’s feelings in On Duty. He was a deep thinker, a scholar even, but he was too much a political man, too much a man of action, and too much a man of practicality to be a Philosopher. He is usually grouped with Zeno and Epictetus, and Seneca and Marcus Aurelius, also men of action, as a Stoic.

[Charlie Hasler · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this. It has left me wanting to read more of Cicero`s works, so that is normally a good sign. The only reason I have given four stars is that this particular edition has some missing text in parts, which could just be my copy but I feel it is something worth mentioning for anyone thinking of reading this edition of the book.

[Jacob Stelling · Rating 4 out of 5]

The quality of Cicero’s oratory definitely lives up to his reputation. This would have been an easy 5 stars for me if there had been more speeches included in this collection rather than so many letters as I much preferred reading the speeches, which is where I thought the rhetoric was best.

[Karen Watkins · Rating 5 out of 5]

Why Cicero? For FUN.
[In the best sense of the word.]

Teachers sometimes hint that Cicero was brilliant: great orator, terrific peephole into Ancient Rome, teaches you how "they" thought, smorgasbord ... Even thinking about such insipid descriptions makes me crave instead a long nap. Shudder. These things are all true, but they sound banal beyond endurance.

What you should know is that reading Cicero is great FUN. He was one of the very political 1% [read: filthy rich] of his time, who loved city, country, & suburbs, & war and peace too. His loves and loyalties, & his hates too, remain original, fresh, delightful reading more than 2,000 years later.


Liveliest intro to Cicero is probably his Marc Antony-bashing ("Second Philippic Against Antony"). "On Old Age" essay is especially interesting too.

Buy the book. You'll love it.

[T.R. Preston · Rating 5 out of 5]

In my opinion, Cicero is one of the most admirable men in human history. A brilliant and brave man. He knew which way the wind was blowing in Rome but chose to take a stand and speak his mind regardless. He was awarded a brutal death for it, but his name has now achieved immortality.

I really wish modern intellectuals would mention Cicero more. His warnings about the end of the Republic are eerily potent these days. We live in dangerous and confusing times, but there are voices from our ancient past that say everything we still need to hear.

[Peter Bradley]

Cicero: Selected Works by Cicero

https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-re...

I read this for the Online Book Group. The reading assignment included the sections on Cicero's correspondence and his Second Philippics against Anthony.

Cicero's correspondence makes for interesting historical reading. This is prime material for anyone interested in the backstory of the late Roman Republic. I can imagine that anyone who writes on the subject has read these letters. For that matter, these letters have made me rethink my approach to history by institutionalizing a strategy of looking for correspondence as a good way of getting a more subjective view of historical events.

The Philippics also serve the purpose of telling us the backstory of history. I'm sure that a lot of what Cicero says about Caesar and Anthony is pure slander, but it kind of tells us what was floating around in the rhetorical space at the time. Also, some of it might be true.

Truth or falsity, aside, Cicero's rhetoric is superb and sometimes side-splitting. Every page drags Anthony through some finely crafted mud. The Philippic is worth reading just to excerpt some examples of high blown insults.

[Frank Theising · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reading through biographies of our nation’s early presidents, Cicero is repeatedly cited or referenced by those great men. It is clear that a good number of our founding fathers (John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and John Quincy Adams in particular) call back to his works frequently. Being a product of a public school education, I couldn’t really tell you the first thing about Cicero. So I asked for this book for Christmas so I could read a sampling of his literary and oratorical works for myself. He did not disappoint.

Cicero wrestled with many deep moral and philosophical subjects that are as relevant today as when they were written. Additionally, he was an ardent defender of liberty and Republicanism in the face of tyranny (by Caesar and later Marc Antony). This short book provides a pretty good sampling of his works (speeches, personal correspondence, Philippics, and philosophical treatises on morality and old age) over the course of several decades of his public life during one of the most eventful periods in Roman history. Solid 4 stars.

What follows are some notes on the book:

From the introduction
“But fundamentally, at all times, he was a moderate, a ‘middle-of-the-road man’; to the two tyrannies, reaction and revolution, he was equally opposed, and whenever either of them became menacing he was on the other side. That is to say, he was a liberal; indeed he is the greatest ancestor of that whole liberal traditional in Western life which is at hazard today. Though he had much else to give the world, this aspect of his character and literary production – his role as an early, thoughtful, articulate, and ultimately self-sacrificing enemy of oppressive an unparliamentary methods of government – is so important, both in his own life and in the subsequent history of the world, that it must be chosen as one of the two leading themes of this volume” (11). [The other theme is cooperation between human beings.]

“His belief in a Law of Nature and Divine Providence led to two things: “first, all human beings, however humble, must count for something, must have some inherent value in themselves….and secondly, this spark of divinity supplies an unbreakable bond of kinship between one man and another.” (12).

“In his presentation of this view Cicero stands about halfway between the agnostic who asserts that man can be truly good without wholehearted adherence to a clearly defined religion, and the Christian who denies it” (13).

“The influence of Cicero upon the history of European literature and ideas greatly exceeds that of any other prose writer in any language. In most of the literary, political, religious, ethical, ad educational controversies that have greatly agitated western mankind he has been passionately and incessantly quoted – usually by both sides.” (24).

From Chapter One – Against Verres

In 70 B.C. Cicero prosecuted Gaius Verres, governor of Sicily for his mismanagement of the government and extortion of the people through large sums collected. Cicero used this speech to restore faith in the government and the idea that even the powerful could face cold justice.

“It is evident to me, and I give you solemn warning, that heaven itself has vouchsafed you this opportunity of rescuing our entire Order from its present unpopularity, disgrace ill-fame, and scandal. People believe the strictness and good faith are not to be found in our courts – indeed, that the courts themselves no longer have any reality. So we Senators are scorned and despised by the people of Rome: long have we labored under this painful burden of disrepute.” (53).

“For here is the man, and here is the case, that will provide answers to the question: will a court of Senators convict a guilty man if he is rich?” (54).

Chapter Two – a selection of his letters and correspondence to friends, family, or colleagues.

Cicero wrote more than 800 letters. The author provides a small sampling of letters to Pompey (whom he admired), Caesar (whom he detested), his friend Atticus, his wife and daughters, and a smattering of lesser known individuals between 62-43 B.C. This provides a nice refresher of the history during that period and Cicero’s life and interactions. Much of the correspondence is rather mundane, but there were a few gems buried in some of them:

To Atticus, 10 April 44 BC – on the death of Caesar and the potential restoration of the Republic.
“What distresses me is something which never happened in any other state, that the recovery of freedom did not mean the revival of free government….Yet come one, come all, the Ides of March are a consolation. Our heroes most splendidly and gloriously achieved everything that lay in their power. The rest requires money and men, and we have neither.” (91).

On returning to Rome in 44 BC, Cicero launched his Philippics against Marc Antony. Cicero naively hoped the young adoptive son of Caesar, Octavian (Augustus), might join in the struggle to restore the Republic. (96).

Chapter 3 – Second Philippic Against Antony
Cicero viewed Antony as an enemy of freedom and laid into him in this lengthy speech. I don’t have any specific highlights or quotes from this one. It was a very entertaining take down of Antony, attacking him from all angles, even some which seemed petty. For this performance, Antony had Cicero beheaded and the hands that wrote the missive chopped off.

Chapter 4 – On Duties (a practical code of behaviour)
This treatise was a manual of right behavior and civics addressed to his son. This was the third book in a series (the first covered Moral Right, the second Advantage). This third book covers what to do when right and advantage clash. His conclusion seems rather unsatisfying to me personally. Namely, he argues that advantages are only perceived, not real, if they hurt society. I.e. If you profit by robbing someone, it is not truly an advantage to you. This redefining of advantage sidesteps the issue and opens the path to always choose the moral course of the more apparently advantageous course (157).

On Duties represents an attempt to provide a moral code for an aristocracy liberated from one tyranny and in danger of being enslaved by another – the loss of political rights being clearly recognized as a corruptor of moral values. Cicero regarded this work as his spiritual testament and masterpiece.

“As the philosophers instruct, one must not only choose the least among evils, one must extract from them any good that they may contain” (160).

“My son: every part of philosophy is fruitful and rewarding, none barren or desolate. But the most luxuriantly fertile field of all is that of our moral obligations – since if we clearly understand these, we have mastered the rules for leading a good and consistent life.” (160)

“The Stoics believe that right is the only good. Your Peripatetics, on the other hand that that right is the highest good.” (162).

“Besides, the Stoics’ ideal is to live consistently with nature. I suppose what they mean is this: throughout our lives we ought invariably to aim at morally right courses of action, and, in so far as we have other aims also, we must select only those which do not clash with such courses. That is another reason why according to the school of thought that I mentioned, there ought never to have been any question of weighing advantage against right, and the whole topic ought to have been excluded from any philosophical discussion.” (163).

“But the Stoics go further, and actually identify advantage with right, insisting that a thing must be right before it can be advantageous.” (166)

“Indeed this idea – that one must not injure anybody else for one’s own profit – is not only natural law, an international valid principle.” (167).

“So everyone ought to have the same purpose: to identify the interest of each with the interest of all. Once men grab for themselves, human society will completely collapse. But if nature prescribes (as she does) that every human being must help every other human being, whoever he is, just precisely because they are all human beings, then – by the same authority – all men have identical interests. Having identical interests means that we are all subject to one and the same law of nature: and, that being so the very least that such a law enjoins is that we must not wrong one another. This conclusion follows inevitably from the truth of the initial assumption.” (168).

“For to rob a completely useless man for your own advantage is an unnatural, inhuman action. If, however, your qualities were such that, provided you stayed alive, you could render great services to your country and to mankind, then there would be nothing blameworthy in taking something from another person for that reason.” (169).

“The point is rather that neglect of the common interest is unnatural, because it is unjust; that nature’s law promotes and coincides with the common interest; and therefore that this law must surely ordain that the means of subsistence may, if necessary, be transferred from the feeble, useless person to the wise, honest, brave man, whose death would be a grave loss to society.” (169).

What Panaetius said “was that apparent advantage could do so [conflict with the right]. But he frequently asserted that nothing can be advantageous unless it is right and nothing right unless it is advantageous.” (170).

“In such a case the question of abandoning the advantage does not arise, since it is axiomatic that where there is wrong there can be no true advantage. For nature demands that all things should be right an harmonious and consistent with itself and therefore with each other. But nothing is less harmonious with nature than wrong doing: and equally, nothing is more I harmony with nature than what is truly advantageous. So advantage cannot possibly coexist with wrong.” (171).

“Imagine yourself doing something in order to acquire excessive wealth or power, or tyranny, or sensual satisfaction. Suppose that no one were going to discover, or even suspect, wat you have done: on the contrary that neither gods nor men would ever have an inkling. Would you do it?

“When we are weighing up what appears to be advantageous against the morally right course, even in matters affecting friends it remains true that the apparent advantage should be disregarded in favor of the right. And when friendship’s demands transgress what is right, they must yield precedence to scruples and honor.” (175).

“If Aquilius’s definition is correct, our lives ought to be completely purged of any misrepresentation or suppression of facts. The application of his ruling will mean that no decent person engaged in buying or selling can ever resort to invention or concealment for his own profit.” (181).

“This then is the conclusion to which we come. Nature is the source of law: and it is contrary to nature for one man to prey upon another’s ignorance. So trickery disguised as intelligence is life’s greatest scourge, being the cause of innumerable illusions of conflict between advantage and right. For extremely few people will refrain from doing a wrong action if they have assurance that this will be both undiscovered and unpunished!” (186).

“Still, in such cases, it does sometimes happen that one course looks right and another advantageous. Yet this must always be a delusion: because right and advantage are, by definition, identical. Once let a man fail to understand that, and no species of fraudulence or crime will come amiss to him. If he argues’ one course is certainly right, but the other is to my advantage’, he will be tearing asunder two things which nature has joined together. And such misguided audacity leads to every sort of deception, crime, and sin.” (187).

“No so-called advantage can possibly compensate for the elimination of your good faith and decency and the consequent destruction of your good name. For if a human exterior conceals the savage heart of a wild beast, their possessor might as well be beast instead of man.” (190).

“No course which is harmful to the state can possibly benefit any of its individual citizens. People who argue that advantage is one thing and right another uprooting the fundamental principles laid down by nature. Obviously we all aim for our own advantage: we find that irresistibly attractive. No one can possibly work against his own interests – indeed no one can refrain from pursuing them to the best of his ability. But seeing that our advantage can only be found in good repute, honor, and right, priority and primacy must be accorded to these. The advantage that goes with them should be interpreted as their indispensable accompaniment rather than a glorious objective in itself.” (200).

“But when we swear an oath, what we ought to have in mind is not such the fear of possible retribution as the sanctity of the obligation we have incurred. For an oath is backed by the whole force of religion: a promise you have solemnly made, with God as your witness, you must keep. This is not a question of the anger of the gods, which does not exist, but of right dealing and good faith.” (201).

Chapter 5 – On Old Age

This was one his philosophical works written during his enforce political imaction during the dictatorship of Caesar and its unsatisfactory aftermath.

“Old age has its own appropriate weapons: namely the study, and the practice, of decent, enlightened living. Do all you can to develop these activities all your life, and as it draws to a close the harvest you reap will be amazing. That is partly for the very important reason that you can go on living in this fashion until your dying day. Besides, there is great satisfaction in the knowledge of a life well spent and the memory of many things well done.” (217).

“When I think about old age I can find four reasons why this is regarded as an unhappy time. First, because it takes us away from active work. Secondly, because it weakens the body. Thirdly, because it derives us of practically all physical pleasures. And fourthly, because it is not far from death.” (219).

In response to active work: “But surely there are also occupations fitted for old men’s minds and brains even when their bodies are infirm.” (219).”…which would you prefer to be given, Milo’s physical vigor, or the intellectual might of Pythagoras? In short, enjoy the blessing of strength while you have it, and have no regrets when it is gone…Life’s course is invariable – nature has one path only, and you cannot travel along it more than once.” (226).

“However the mind and spirit need even more attention than the body, for old age easily extinguishes them, like lamps when they are not given oil. And whereas exercises can wear the body out, they stimulate the mind.” (227).

“Next we come to the third allegation against old age. This was its deficiency in sensual pleasures. But if age really frees us from youth’s most dangerous failing, then we are receiving a most blessed gift.” (228).

“It will be generally agreed that during the process of enjoyment he is incapable of any rational, logical, or cerebral process. The consequence is that such pleasures are exceptionally repulsive and harmful. Indeed, their substantial, prolonged indulgence will plunge the whole light of the spirit into darkness.” (229).

“But please bear in mind, throughout this discussion, that to deserve all these compliments of mine, old age must have its foundations well laid in early life. Which means (as I once said in public, amid general approval) that an old age in need of self-justification is unenviable. White hairs and wrinkles cannot suddenly usurp authority, since this only comes as a final result of well-spent early years.” (238)

On the fourth objection, nearness to death: “When a man is old, there can obviously be no doubt that it is near. Yet if, during his long life, he has failed to grasp that death is of no account he is unfortunate indeed. There are two alternatives: either death completely destroys human souls, in which case it is negligible; or it removes the soul to some place of eternal life – in which case its coming is greatly to be desired. There can be no third possibility. If, then, after death I shall either lack unhappiness or even be positively happy, I have nothing whatever to fear.” (240).

[Adah B.]

Humanities reading: Second Philippic Against Antony and On Duties, III.

[Big Nate · Rating 4 out of 5]

Always a pleasure to read Cicero

[Jon Gaide · Rating 2 out of 5]

Putting this on my "I'm too dumb for this book" shelf.

Is Cicero one of the best orators of all time? I'm sure. Was it neat to get a firsthand glimpse into Ancient Rome? Certainly. But reading this before bed when I could instead be reading about fairies going nuts on each other? It's a no from me

[Henrik Haapala · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Which would you prefer to be given, Milo’s physical vigour, or the intellectual might of Pythagoras?”

Quote I’m looking for:

“The best armour of old age is a well spent life preceding it; a life employed in the pursuit of useful knowledge, in honorable actions and the practice of virtue; in which he who labours to improve himself from his youth, will in age reap the happiest fruits of them; not only because these never leave a man, not even in the extremest old age; but because a conscience bearing witness that our life was well-spent, together with the remembrance of past good actions, yields an unspeakable comfort to the soul.”

/Cicero (De senectute)

Another version:

“Old age has its own appropriate weapons: namely the study, and the practice, of decent, enlightened living. Do all you can to develop these activities all your life, and as it draws to a close the harvest you reap will be amazing. That is partly for the very important reason that you can go on living in this fashion until your dying day. Besides, there is great satisfaction in the knowledge of a life well spent and the memory of many things well done.” 216-217

[Nemo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Cicero and Cognitive Therapy share essence: the unmasking of irrational or deleterious thoughts, fostering emotional equilibrium. Cicero found solace in opposing tyranny and lauding the sanctuary of friendship, akin to modern psychotherapy's pursuit of social harmony. For him, nature's design veiled humanity in inherent goodness, a path seldom trod. Contrarily, Christianity illuminates the sinful stain, a fervor for divine guidance. Yet, Cicero's name persists through ages, a torch passed from Augustine to the Dead Poets Society.

[Adam]

I didn't realise how much it was possible to hate Antony

[Jason · Rating 2 out of 5]

In ancient Rome, Somnus (otherwise known as Hypnos in Greece) was a personification of sleep. He lived in a cave that contained the river Lethe(forgetfulness). Somnus is only tangentially connected to Cicero via and time and place but he is being mentioned here because he visited me several times while I was reading Cicero’s Selected Works. Without diminishing its historical importance, I will say that this book was a crashing bore that persistently made me drowsy and Somnus successfully lured me into his cave several times throughout the course of this short 200 page essay collection.

Cicero was a Roman statesman, neither patrician nor plebeian and also an outsider because of his obsessive-compulsive insistence on moral purity and honesty at any cost. He came from the Stoic school of philosophers. It could be tempting to say that Cicero’s political life was more exciting than his ideas, he had five men executed in the Catilinian Conspiracy to prevent the senate from being overthrown and he supported the assassination of Julius Caeser, but he is most famous for his oratorical skills and writings in Latin concerning the ethical branch of philosophy.

Since Cicero’s forte was public speaking, this collection opens with a transcribed speech in which he denounces Verres, the corrupt governor of Sicily. He denounces Verres for nepotism, bribery, and debauchery while declaring the superiority of running government as a system of laws as opposed to the tyranny of men. As far as speeches go, this is a good one with precise phrasing, effective punctuation, rhythmic cadences, a mixture of abstract and concrete ideas , and a sufficient buildup of thematic tensions to keep the audience engaged. Compare this to the transcribed speeches of Martin Luther King Jr. or Barack Obama and you can see how a good speech works just as well in writing as it does in speaking. Hearing it spoken in the echoing chamber of the Roman senate must have been impressive. But a clear picture of Cicero, with his Apollonian self-righteousness, begins to emerge early on. While I am inclined to agree with Cicero that honesty in government is necessary, if I wanted to have a good time, I would rather seek out the company of Verres.

The essay “The Second Phillippic Against Antony” is another work of character assassination that targets another individual. Again, despite the moral indignation, Cicero makes Antony look like an interesting character in contrast to Ciecro’s high ground which certainly is higher but certainly not exciting. Antony, after all, was the guy who got to fuck Cleopatra. In these polemics, Cicero presents us with such a stark contrast of the rigid orderliness of Apollonian ethics and the disorienting, life affirming celebrations of Dionysus, the polar tensions that have defined the human experience up until the present day.

The second section of Selected Works is a collection of excerpts from letters Cicero wrote to his friends and colleagues, many of which were penned during his time of exile from Rome. He comments on politics and some battles. There isn’t anything of interest here unless you are deeply immersed in the study of Roman history. These read like footnotes and supplements to a more significant work on the history of the empire and as a casual reader, I didn’t get much out of them.

Moving on, there is a dull essay called “on Duties” pertaining to ethics and honesty, mostly in regards to commerce and the marketplace. No doubt, this Stoic philosopher probably had his own personal grievance in this matter since when he returned from exile, he found that his property had been confiscated and sold without his permission, although I am not sure if that happened before or after this essay was written. I actually don’t care enough to bother checking the dates. Cicero uses the criteria of moral righteousness and advantage to evaluate the ethics of non-disclosure in financial transactions. (Yes, I know you are yawning already) Morality means adhering to what is natural and since lying is unnatural it is immoral. Therefore, using deception to gain an advantage in a sale is unnatural and fundamentally against morality. Even though, as an honest type of a person, I am inclined to agree with this concept, it still seems like a flawed argument and a reductio ad absurdum as well. Cicero spends very little time examining nuance in his argument nor does he address the ambiguous concepts of “natural” or “advantageous” in sufficient detail.

The equation of nature with morality is a problematic construct since morality is inherently subjective and humanistically determined, hence not natural. Deceptiveness is also not unnatural since an insect may have evolved to look like a plant in order to camouflage itself from predators. This would be entirely natural and since being deceptive in this way would further ensure the survival of that individual insect and benefit its species if it successfully reproduces then this deception is not immoral from a human standpoint either. So Cicero’s argument collapses almost immediately and without much effort from the reader. Forging German passports and visas to help Jewish people escape concentration camps would just as well be a form of deception that is morally justifiable. I could imagine Richard Dawkins beating the crap out of Cicero but to be fair I do see the rudiments of game theory in this essay since Cicero argues that more people in society benefit when business is conducted honestly and with minimal conflict than otherwise. Cicero just doesn’t take his argument far enough. His concepts of “moral”, “honest”, “deception”, and “advantage” are not sufficiently defined here, unfortunately, to make the argument work.

The final essay, “On Old Age” addresses the topic you would expect it to. The Stoic Cicero comes out in favor of the elderly, essentially arguing that old age is superior to youth. Since physical strength declines as we age, we get more time to spend enhancing the life of the mind. As a philosopher and ethicist, Cicero is far more concerned with philosophical and educational matters than he is with strength which is good for little more than menial labor and warfare. In his view, the thinkers get to rule society while everybody else gets stuck doing their shitwork. These ideas are neither surprising nor lofty but they are refreshing in today’s world where being young and stupid is valued over being old and wise. It is even worse now with the younger generations that rail against racism, sexism, and homophobia while expressing a vile and nasty hatred towards anybody over the age of forty. Ageism is just as much a form of discrimination as those other ills and expressing ageist ideas can very well be considered hate speech in some circumstances. But in the internet matrix world, young people know everything and old people know nothing so that is just how it is nowadays, be it sensible or not.

Overall, Cicero comes off to me as a morally upright prig, the kind of po-faced killjoy who screams at people for farting in his presence. If there is one thing that John Milton proves it is that we need villains in order to make life interesting. It was the upright and uptight American Puritans who banned Christmas celebrations and alcohol during Prohibition. It is the Islamic Wahhabis and Salafis that try to purify the world by draining all the joy and color out of everything. It is the homicidal monk in Umberto Eco’s The Name Of the Rose who kills someone for laughing, claiming that laughter is immoral because Jesus never laughed. Bone-dry morality is just as boring as a pile of cardboard. Even conman Christian preachers have figured out that nothing puts a congregation to sleep faster than a sermon on righteousness. That’s why the grifter evangelicals have injected so much showmanship into their prosperity gospel with razzle-dazzle stories about going to war against Satan. Why do you think that Qanon inspires fanaticism when Methodism and Lutheranism don’t? While most intelligent people who aren’t sociopaths would be inclined to agree with what Cicero had to say about ethics, that doesn’t mean his beliefs were exciting to read. The people he attacks are far more exciting. He certainly was an important historical figure and I have no interest or intention of taking that away from him, but these Selected Works are little more than a cure for insomnia to me.

https://grimhistory.blogspot.com/

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

To take Cicero in perspective means to appreciate him for his place in history: a dutiful man obligated to the height of power yet checked by a righteous way of life. In an age of paganism and violence, such methodical stoicism is a mastery of self. I’m reminded of the Confucian Analects, which I really disliked, as I found the idea of servitude to those in power for the benefit of the state and maximum utility to be obvious and without any altruistic benefit, nor soulful fulfillment. Cicero is the western answer. He gave himself to Rome yet looked deep within himself for the answers to how to live. Moreover, he implored the state to live this way and it’s politicians to govern this way or be removed. Such a societal commitment feels bygone as the world gets so much larger. But it resonates with me as a deeply fulfilling existence: to live in a righteous way and create a state which stands for the same for its people.

I hadn’t visited stoicism in quite some time but such self-control and patience are an ever-welcome virtue to revisit. To look beyond pleasures in life is something we all must look into if we are to have a fulfilling time on earth; if it is not the central tenet, it is foundational to any other structure of belief.

[Daniel Vaughan · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent collection of Cicero’s works. You might want to take a cursory look at Roman history as it existed in Cicero’s life before jumping into this. The introductions before the correspondence and various longer works is great and place everything in its place. But some general knowledge is helpful.

The letters were of limited interest to me. Cicero’s views on government, life, and old age were the main events and they did not disappoint. Cicero’s knowledge of all the Greek and Roman philosophical traditions is thorough and he weaves in and out of those ideas expertly.

You might wonder why Cicero died. After you read his speeches lighting his political opponents on fire, you won’t wonder that anymore. Even by modern standards, breaking down the sins of a man on the Senate floor — and mocking him to boot — is a sight to behold.

Good translation as well. The context the translators provide is helpful, especially in the correspondence section.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

The philosophy may not be completely original (as he seems to mostly be drawing from previous philosophers and expounding on them a bit) but what he does so well is placing the ancient philosophy in a more modern and "useable" context. Aritstotle and Plato produced excellent ideas but Cicero took some of these and actually gave me things to apply to the contemporary world. Then, in terms of the letters, he just provides a very nice picture of what Rome was really like. It's a nice selection for both philosophical and historical context.

[Ellis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Cicero is at his best when he's just slagging people off, in this case that good for nothing Antony.
His sort of lawyering in the Philippics would nowadays be condemned as libel but it sure was entertaining.

When Cicero is trying to be wise though he is just a bit bland with nothing particularly enlightening to offer.

The one exception being his thoughts on old age, he somehow doesn't make it sound too bad after all.

[Jackson Cyril · Rating 3 out of 5]

Imagine a reader, 2000 years hence, forced to read the orations of Burke or Gladstone in translation and one gets close to the idea of trying to appreciate Cicero in a modern English translation. The wisdom is there, but we have greater moralists today. Perhaps when my Latin improves, I can hear Cicero's thunder in his native language.

[jiik · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've read several times that Cicero was one of the best Roman orators, and his speeches and letters were exemplars for centuries, but it's hard to see any of that in English translated nearly 2000 years later. In its current form, it's nothing special. I don't think there's much point in reading Cicero if it's not in Latin.