Ciceros Beweisführung aus der Wahrscheinlichkeit im Geldstreit zwischen dem Schauspieler Roscius und Fannius Chaerea
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12797/CC.26.2023.26.09Keywords:
probability, truth, persuasion, money disputeAbstract
The paper explores the argumentation from probability in Cicero’s speech Pro Roscio comoedo, concerning the financial litigation between a famous Roman actor Quintus Roscius and an unknown businessman Fannius Chaerea. The Roman rhetorician had analysed the question of probability in his earlier dissertation De inventione, which influenced his art of persuasion. Because of lack of the strong proofs the arguments from probability played a great role in the defence of Roscius. Cicero used different types of likelihood arguments: syllogistic argument from probability, credibilia, incredibilia, verisimilia, as well as the arguments from ethos and kedros. He seems to be here aware of the Greek theory of argumentation present in the writings of Aristotle and Rhetorica ad Alexandrum. The Roman orator recalled often the truth and juxtaposed it with the probability. Cicero employed likelihood proofs in his speech, both in argumentation and in refutation.
PlumX Metrics of this article
References
Axer J., 1976, Mowa Cycerona w obronie aktora komediowego Roscjusza. Studium z krytyki tekstu, Wrocław – Warszawa – Kraków – Gdańsk.
Axer J., 1980, The Style and the Composition of Cicero’s Speech Pro Q. Roscio Comoedo: Origin and Function, Warszawa.
Calboli Montefusco L., 1992, ‘Cicerone, De oratore: la doppia funzione dell’ethos dell’oratore’, Rhetorica 10/3, S. 245–259, https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1992.10.3.245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1992.10.3.245
Calboli Montefusco L., 1998, ‘Omnis autem argumentatio… aut probabilis aut necessaria esse debebit (Cic. Inv. 1.44)’, Rhetorica 16/1, S. 1–24, https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1998.16.1.1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/rht.1998.0037
Chiron P., 1998, ‘À propos d’une série de pisteis dans la Rhétorique à Alexandre (Ps.-Aristote, Rh. Al, chap. 7-14)’, Rhetorica 16/4, S. 349–391, https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1998.16.4.349. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/rht.1998.0000
Freese J.H. (ed.), 1956, Cicero. The Speeches, Cambridge – London. Gagarin M., 1997, Antiphon: The Speeches, Cambridge.
Haury A., 1955, L’ironie et l’humour chez Cicéron, Leiden.
Hellwig A., 1973, Untersuchungen zur Theorie der Rhetorik bei Platon und Aristoteles, Göttingen.
Hermann M., 2012, ‘Die Wahrscheinlichkeit als Argumentationsmittel in Ciceros Rede Pro Quinctio’, Gymnasium 119/6, S. 522–542.
Hermann M., 2021, Prawdopodobieństwo w retoryce antycznej, Toruń.
Hoffman D.C., 2008, ‘Concerning Eikos: Social Expectation and Verisimilitude in Early Attic Rhetoric’, Rhetorica 26/1, S. 1–29, https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2008.26.1.1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/rht.2008.0020
Hołówka T., 1998, Błędy, spory, argumenty. Szkice z logiki stosowanej, Warszawa.
Ineichen R., 1996, Würfel und Wahrscheinlichkeit. Stochastisches Denken in der Antike, Heidelberg – Berlin – Oxford.
Klingner F., 1953, Ciceros Rede für den Schauspieler Roscius. Eine Episode in der Entwicklung seiner Kunstprosa, München.
Kraus M., 2010, ‘Perelman’s Interpretation of Reverse Probability Arguments as a Dialectical Mise en Abyme’, Philosophy & Rhetoric 43/4, S. 362– 382, https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.43.4.0362. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.43.4.0362
Kraus M., 2011, ‘How to Classify the Means of Persuasion: The Rhetoric to Alexander and Aristotle on Pisteis’, Rhetorica 29/3, S. 263–279, https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2011.29.3.263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/rht.2011.0011
Lausberg H., 1960, Rhetorisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik, München.
Lintott A., 2008, Cicero as Evidence: A Historian’s Companion, Oxford, https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199216444.001.0001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199216444.001.0001
Madden E.H., 1957, ‘Aristotle’s Treatment of Probability and Signs’, Philosophy of Science 24/2, S. 167–172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/287530
Morrow G.R., 1953, ‘Plato’s Conception of Persuasion’, The Philosophical Review 62/2, S. 234–250, https://doi.org/10.2307/2182794. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2182794
Moussy C., 2005, ‘Probare, probatio, probabilis dans le vocabulaire de la démonstration’, Pallas 69, S. 31–41.
Pflüger H.H., 1904, Ciceros Rede Pro Q. Roscio Comoedo. Rechtlich Beleuchtet Und Verwertet, Leipzig.
Pittia S., 2004, ‘Vraies et fausses redécouvertes du plaidoyer cicéronien pro Roscio Comœdo’, Revue de philologie, de littérature et d’histoire anciennes 78/2, S. 265–288, https://doi.org/10.3917/phil.782.0265. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/phil.782.0265
Reinhardt T., 2010, ‘Plausibility in Plato’s “Phaedrus” and the “Rhetorica ad Alexandrum”’, Museum Helveticum 67/1, S. 1–6.
Sambursky S., 1956, ‘On the Possible and Probable in Ancient Greece’, Osiris 12, S. 35–48, https://doi.org/10.1086/368595. https://doi.org/10.1353/ajp.2000.0014 Schmitz T., 2000, ‘Plausibility in the Greek Orators’, The American Journal of Philology 121/1, S. 47–77, https://doi.org/10.1353/ajp.2000.0014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/ajp.2000.0014
Schöpsdau K., 1996, ‘Frage rhetorische’, [in:] Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik, Band 3, G. Ueding (Hrsg.), Darmstadt, S. 445–454.
Schwitalla J., 1984, ‘Textliche und Kommunikative Funktionen rhetorischer Fragen’, Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 12, S. 131–155, https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgl.1984.12.2.131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgl.1984.12.2.131
Scodel R., 1999, Credible Impossibilities: Conventions and Strategies of Verisimilitude in Homer and Greek Tragedy, Stuttgart – Leipzig.
Stroh W., 1975, Taxis und Taktik, Stuttgart, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110951318. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110951318
Turasiewicz R., 1988, ‘Słowo jest wielkim mocarzem. Z badań nad teorią wymowy Gorgiasza z Leontynów’, Przegląd Humanistyczny 32/6, S. 1–12.
Zantwijk van T., 2009, ‘Wahrscheinlichkeit, Wahrheit’, [in:] Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik, Band 9, G. Ueding (Hrsg.), Darmstadt, S. 1285–1340, https://doi.org/10.1515/hwro.9.wahrscheinlichkeit_wahrheit. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/hwro.9.wahrscheinlichkeit_wahrheit
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.