For Lucius Murena
Pro L. Murena
Headnote
Cicero’s defence as consul of the consul-elect Lucius Licinius Murena on a charge of ambitus (electoral bribery), brought under Cicero’s own bribery law (the Lex Tullia) by Servius Sulpicius Rufus, the defeated rival candidate, and by Marcus Cato, the tribune-elect, with the younger Servius Sulpicius and Gaius Postumus joining the prosecution. The trial falls in the last days of November 63 BC, between the Second Catilinarian (9 November) and the Third (3 December): Catiline is in the field at Manlius’s camp, Lentulus and the rest of the urban conspirators are at large in the city, and the consul-designate of January is on trial for his life. To convict Murena would leave one consul on the Kalends of January — and that consul (Decimus Silanus, the other consul-elect) without a colleague in the year of the Catilinarian crisis. Cicero, who as consul has just driven the bribery law through, defends a man accused under it; that anomaly is the speech’s first business, and the proem (§1–10) explains it as the consul’s duty to the commonwealth.
The body of the speech is a triptych. The first part (§11–14) deals with the alleged scandals of Murena’s life — so thin that the prosecution has had to fall back on calling him a dancer, which Cicero turns into a small set piece on what kind of man would dance. The second (§15–53) is the famous comparison of Murena’s soldierly career under Lucullus in the Mithridatic war with Sulpicius’s career as a jurist at Rome — with the digression on the absurdity of legal study (the Sabine farm dialogue at §26, the joke that Cicero will declare himself a lawyer in three days, the rule that those who could not turn out as orators slip into the law as those who could not turn out as harpers slip into the pipe-playing). The third (§54–85) takes up the actual bribery charges, mostly from Cato; what gives the section its colour is its parallel digression on Stoic morality, where Cicero (with elaborate respect for Cato as a man) parodies Cato’s adherence to the Zenonian rigorism — the wise man pardons no fault, all faults are equal, the wise man never changes his opinion — and proposes that some study with Plato and Aristotle would have made Cato no better but a little gentler. The contrast with Scipio at home with Panaetius (and with Cato’s own great-grandfather, the most affable of Stoics) lands the joke without insult.
The closing peroration (§78–90) drops the wit and turns to the Catilinarian danger. The Trojan horse is within the walls; the consul has weeks to live in office; if Murena is condemned, on the Kalends of January there will be only one consul, and that consul without a colleague in the year that is to be. The set piece is the projection of where the convicted man would go: home to see his father’s laurelled portrait disfigured, to his mother who has just kissed her son the consul, into exile in the East where he had been legate or in Transalpine Gaul where his brother now governs. Murena was acquitted; he served the consulship; the conspirators in the city were executed by order of the Senate within a fortnight.