Speeches in ancient texts

[ASCLEPIADES]

A quick look at Wikipedia tells me that of Cicero's works : six on rhethoric have survied and eight on philosophy. Eighty-eight speeches were recorded, only fifty-eight survive.

Interesting.

 

From the hand of Cicero?

 

Salve, amici! Welcome, AJ!

 

After two millennia and many turns of peoples, countries and civilizations, we shouldn't be surprised that only 58/88 ciceronian speeches survived. We should be amazed that 66% (2/3) of his recorded speeches were able to get to us. All considered, an extraordinary score. One of the reasons might have been that his books were real best-sellers.

 

Any ancient book reached us through myriad hands' rewriting and editing. For Cicero's works, his freedman MT Tiro was probably the first one.

[P.Clodius]

A quick look at Wikipedia tells me that of Cicero's works : six on rhethoric have survied and eight on philosophy. Eighty-eight speeches were recorded, only fifty-eight survive.

Interesting.

 

From the hand of Cicero?

 

Salve, amici! Welcome, AJ!

 

After two millennia and many turns of peoples, countries and civilizations, we shouldn't be surprised that only 58/88 ciceronian speeches survived. We should be amazed that 66% (2/3) of his recorded speeches were able to get to us. All considered, an extraordinary score. One of the reasons might have been that his books were real best-sellers.

 

Any ancient book reached us through myriad hands' rewriting and editing. For Cicero's works, his freedman MT Tiro was probably the first one.

Most of Cicero's 'speeches' weren't actually speeches but pieces of post facto self glorification. Cicero tended to crap himself under pressure and his actual speeches reflected this. But still, I love Cicero all the same...

[M. Porcius Cato]

If "most" still means "the majority," then most of Cicero's speeches were speeches.

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

Many of the speeches and orations quoted by the ancient historians would have come to them second, third or even fourth hand so the chances of them not being word perfect is pretty great. I think the basis and the point of the speech/oration etc will still be there but over time the way in which it had been delivered could have been misinterpreted or taken out of context to suit the authors political leanings and so on, so what we are left with is the basic outline but with all the hazy bits filled in by others, I suppose it's a bit like the game Chinese whispers in a way?

[WotWotius]

Many of the speeches and orations quoted by the ancient historians would have come to them second, third or even fourth hand so the chances of them not being word perfect is pretty great. I think the basis and the point of the speech/oration etc will still be there but over time the way in which it had been delivered could have been misinterpreted or taken out of context to suit the authors political leanings and so on, so what we are left with is the basic outline but with all the hazy bits filled in by others, I suppose it's a bit like the game Chinese whispers in a way?

 

Yes, the role of the speech is to capture the essence of it orator. Although they were obviously based on truth, the subtle changes the original speeches went through over the years meant that the historians of old would have to fill in plenty of gaps. In saying 'Speeches in the texts of old are almost certainly a fabrication mustered up by the imagination of their authors...' I did not mean that they were completely fanciful -- despite their shortcomings, most of the ancient sources contain a large element of truth -- I meant that the text of the speeches was probably made-up, but the characters and the event with which they deal were not.

[Agrippina of the Julii]

A quick look at Wikipedia tells me that of Cicero's works : six on rhethoric have survied and eight on philosophy. Eighty-eight speeches were recorded, only fifty-eight survive.

Interesting.

 

From the hand of Cicero?

 

 

Yes, according to Wiki.

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

The historian S.A.Handford hits the nail on the head regarding the reliability of the ancient historians. In his introduction to The Jurgurthine War / The Conspiracy Of Catiline he says..........

 

In the ancient world, historians were less concerned than they are nowadays with the detailed investigation of facts by means of critical research. They tended to regard history not as the rigorous pursuit of truth with a view to it's correct interpretation, but either as a branch of poetry or a prose epic - composed in order to please and to instruct the reader in the traditions of his people, or of other peoples, or else a branch of rhetoric or philosophy, which sort to inspire him by presenting vividly before his eyes the great men and great actions of the past, to impress him by preaching sermons upon the proven consequences of vice and depravity, or finally to enlist his sympathy by attacking or defending the characters and motives of particular groups of individuals.