Journal articles on the topic 'Cicero, Marcus Tullius De officiis'

This article covers the role of Ancient Roman statesman and intellectual Marcus Tullius Cicero in the culture of the United States of America during the 18th and 19th centuries, particularly his influence on the formation of democracy in the US. While the recent decades have witnessed the increasing scholarly attention to the impact of Cicero on the early political culture of the US, the body of historical research, especially the Ukrainian one, lacks general analyses of Cicero’s role in the American political system during the emergence of the American state and its existence on the early stages of its history. After a general overview of the historical context of Cicero’s biography and legacy, this article pays a particular attention to his impact on the creation of United States democracy. A significant number of Cicero’s ideas, more or less, had been reflected in the concepts which defined the newly created American democracy. The most important concepts in this regard are the ideas of a republic government, private property, just laws, and forms of state structure. Apart from the general importance of Cicero’s ideas for the early American democracy, Marcus Tullius Cicero himself was a notable example for some Founding Fathers of the US, especially for the 2nd President John Adams. During the 19th century, Cicero continued to play a significant role in the American society, specially in the fields of education and public speaking.

The importance of Thomas Hobbes?s account of personation and representation can hardly be overstated. And his intellectual debt to one of his classical foes, Marcus Tullius Cicero, can hardly be ignored. This paper compares Hobbes?s ideas on personhood of the state with Cicero?s notion of persona civitatis, and attempts to describe how Hobbes reshaped Cicero?s guidelines for (re)presenting legitimate authority into a prop for defending any effective authority. Hobbes absorbs Cicero?s influential argument and builds on the idea of civic representation as guardianship done by role-playing, while tearing down Cicero?s account?s ethical foundations. In contrast to Cicero?s magistrate, the social role of Hobbes?s sovereign is not scripted by ethical constrains: its purpose is not to restrict license, but to present it.

The article analyses which works of Marcus Tullius Cicero are mentioned and (or) quoted in the textbook on the rhetoric of the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy “Orator Mohileanus” (1636) by Joseph Kononovich-Gorbatsky. The Ukrainian teacher prefers the speeches of the Roman orator. 49 speeches of Cicero are mentioned or quoted 228 times (16 legal speeches — 148 times, 33 political speeches — 80 times).There are three cases of special attention to Cicero’s speeches: their chronology is presented; the technique of confirmation is analysed on the example of “In Defense of Archias the Poet” and common places are collected for imitation. Among Cicero’s treatises on oratory, the most popular are “Rhetorica ad Herennium” (as Joseph Kononovich-Gorbatsky means, authored by Cicero) and “About the Subdivisions of Oratory”. In total, seven rhetorical treatises are mentioned or cited 101 times. A special role is given to “About the Subdivisions of Oratory”. The structure of the first treatise clearly repeats the composition of the work of the Roman classic, the titles of the sections are duplicated, parallels are constantly drawn. Unlike other rhetorical works, Cicero’s “About the Subdivisions of Oratory” are quoted in Ukrainian rhetoric in large fragments. Six Tullius’s philosophical works are sporadically (12 times) presented in Ukrainian rhetoric; Cicero’s letters — three times only.

Marcus Tullius Cicero Akademeia felsefesi ile ilgili görüşlerini üç ayrı kitapta açıklamıştır: Tanrıların Doğası (De Natura Deorum), Hortensius ve Academica. Cicero Academica'yı İ.Ö. 45 yılında ilkin Catulus ve Lucullus adıyla iki bölümden oluşan bir kitap olarak yayımlamıştır (Academica Priora). Sonra yayınladığı bu kitabı gözden geçirmiş ve dört bölümde yeniden yayımlamaya karar vermiştir (Academica Posteriora). Böylece o dönemde Cicero'nun bu çalışmasının hem ilk baskısını hem de yeniden düzenleyip yayımladığı ikinci baskısını bulmak mümkündü. Günümüze ise bu iki baskıdan (Academica Priora ve Academica Posteriora) Academica Priora'nın yalnızca ikinci, yani Lucullus adı altındaki 148 paragraflık bölümü ve Academica Posteriora'nın 46 paragraflık birinci bölümü ve fragmentler kalmıştır.

The Bobiensian scholiast tells us that the speech Pro Archia was delivered by Cicero in a court presided over by his brother Quintus as praetor, who held this office in 62 B.C. The scholiast makes two clear references to Quintus (ad Pro Archia 3):(a) Archias presented this case, dealing with the Papian law on Roman citizenship, in the court of Quintus Cicero, the brother of this Marcus Tullius …(b) It is significant that he makes mention of the praetor himself, that is of his brother Quintus Cicero, who was in charge of the trial. Indeed, it is most appropriate that he speaks in praise of a fine poet in the court of someone who takes pleasure in pursuits of this kind, for Quintus Cicero was a writer not only of epic, but also of tragedy.

Although widely recognized for his oratorical prowess, the collection of intellectual works that Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BCE) has generated on persuasive interchange is almost unknown to those in the human sciences. Building on six texts on rhetoric attributed to Cicero (Rhetorica ad Herennium, De Inventione, Topica, Brutus, De Oratore, and Orator), I claim not only that Cicero may be recognized as a pragmatist philosopher and analytic ethnographer but also that his texts have an enduring relevance to the study of human knowing and acting. More specifically, thus, Cicero's texts are pertinent to more viable conceptualizations of an array of consequential pragmatist matters. These include influence work and resistance, impression management and deception, agency and culpability, identity and emotionality, categorizations and definitions of the situation, and emergence and process.

Marcus Tullius Cicero is considered to be one of the greatest Roman statesmen and orators, however, this lucid creator?s philosophical writings lie in the shadow of his highly valued speeches, rhetorical writings and letters. He is widely regarded as a politician, lawyer, orator, yet few consider him a philosopher. This seems unjustified, having in mind that he received an outstanding philosophical education, wrote about numerous philosophical subjects, translated and explicated Greek authors and their philosophical doctrine. The goal of this paper is to show Cicero?s contribution to the transfer of Greek philosophy onto Latin soil, illuminate his role in the creation of Latin philosophical terminology, as well as reasons which motivated him to do so. Our subject will be presented from a linguoculturological aspect with the analysis of some of the terms, which Cicero imported into Latin philosophical vocabulary.

To fully understand St. Augustine’s Cassiciacum dialogues, one must understand how they relate to the philosophical works of Marcus Tullius Cicero. Specifically, Augustine’s Contra Academicos is a response to Cicero’s Academica; and his De beata uita is a response to Cicero’s De finibus and Tusculanæ disputationes; and his De ordine is a response to Cicero’s trilogy on providence, De natura deorum, De diuinatione, and De fato. Recognizing the connection between these works sheds new light on the meaning and importance of the Cassiciacum dialogues.

İ.Ö. 106-43 yılları arası yaşamış Marcus Tullius Cicero etkili konuşmaları ve devlet adamlığı yetenekleriyle İ.Ö. 63 yılında en yüksek kamu görevi olan consullüğe yükselmiştir. Cicero, bu görevde iken consullük seçimi sırasında yenilgiye uğrattığı Catilina, yandaşlarıyla birlikte düzene karşı isyan çıkarmıştır. Cicero'nun hem halkın hem de senatonun önünde yaptığı ustaca hazırlanmış coşkulu konuşmalarından etkilenen senato Catilina'nın yandaşları için idam kararı almış ve karar uygulanmıştır İ.Ö. 63 . Ama sonradan İ.Ö. 58 yılında halk tribunu Clodius'un senatoya verdiği yasa önerisiyle senato, Roma yurttaşlarının yargılanmadan idam edilmesini yasaklamıştır. Hukuksal geçerliliği kuşkulu olsa da bu yasaya göre Cicero'nun Catilina yandaşlarını idam ettirmiş olması suç sayılmıştı. Cicero, bu durumda kendini savunmadan Roma'dan uzaklaşmasının kendisi için acı da olsa Roma için daha iyi olacağını düşünmüş ve Roma'dan ayrılmıştır. Cicero'nun consullüğü sonrasındaki bu dönemde 62-57 Roma çalkantılar içindedir. Cicero'nun sürgünden sonra senatoya ve halka vermiş olduğu söylevler Post Reditum in Senatu ve Post Reditum ad Quirites bu çalkantılar hakkında bilgi verir niteliktedir.

One of the great authorities in the antiquity who wrote about old age was Marcus Tullius Cicero, the author of „Cato Maior De senectute [Cato the Elder on Old Age]”. The famous orator wrote this work in 44 BCE and dedicated it to his friend Atticus. The author himself was almost 62 years old at that time, and Atticus 65. Cicero wrote the work in a dialogue form, setting the action in 150 BCE, the speakers being Marcus Porcius Cato the Elder, who in this case presented the views of Cicero, Publius Cornelius Scipio the Younger and Gaius Laelius Sapiens. Cicero followed the example of a Greek treatise on old age, probably written by a third-century BCE Peripatetic philosopher, Aristo of Ceos. The concept of the presentation of the treatise is based on comparison of two different views on old age. In one, sorrow and anxiety are visible. Through Cato’s words, Cicero names four reasons why people regard old age as an unhappy period of life: a). it moves us away from active life; b). it weakens physical strength, c). it deprives us of all sensual pleasures, d). it is close to death. The other view, represented by Cato, disproves the ob­jections against old age, recommending calmness, activity, and moderation. Interestingly enough, apart from philosophical or medical arguments, Cicero also refers to political, religious, social and cultural aspects. The apologia for old age presented by Cicero was not always reflected in the reality. Roman sources, especially legal documents, inform about attempted suicide or euthanasia by the elderly. The fundamental reason was the condition of health and physical pain as well as mental illnesses, but the direct motive associated with old age was taedium vitae – weariness of life.

Whereas Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and Augustine are probably the best known of the early Western philosophers of religion, Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BCE) also played a particularly consequential role in the development and continuity of Greco-Latin-European social thought. Cicero may be best known for his work on rhetoric and his involvements in the political intrigues of Rome, but Cicero’s comparative examinations of the Greco-Roman philosophies of his day merit much more attention than they have received from contemporary scholars. Cicero’s considerations of philosophy encompass much more than the theological issues considered in this statement, but, in the process of engaging Epicurean and Stoic thought from an Academician (Platonist) perspective, Cicero significantly extends the remarkable insights provided by Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Although especially central to the present analysis, Cicero’s On the Nature of the Gods (1972) is only one of several texts that Cicero directs to a comparative (multiparadigmatic and transhistorical) analysis of divine and human knowing. Much of Cicero’s treatment of the philosophy of religion revolves around variants of the Socratic standpoints (i.e., dialectics, theology, moralism) that characterized the philosophies of Cicero’s era (i.e., Stoicism, Epicureanism, Academician dialectics), but Cicero also engages the matters of human knowing and acting in what may be envisioned as more distinctively pragmatist sociological terms. As well, although Cicero’s materials reflect the socio-historical context in which he worked, his detailed analysis of religion represents a valuable source of comparison with present day viewpoints and practices. Likewise, a closer examination of Cicero’s texts indicates that many of the issues of divine and human knowing, with which he explicitly grapples, have maintained an enduring conceptual currency. This paper concludes with a consideration of the relevance of Cicero’s works for a contemporary pragmatist sociological (symbolic interactionist) approach to the more generic study of human knowing and acting.

The foundation for Rome's imperial bureaucracy was laid during the first century B.C., when functional and administrative writing played an increasingly dominant role in the Late Republic. During the First and Second Triumvirates, Roman society, once primarily oral, relied more and more on documentation to get its official business done. By the reign of Augustus, the orator had ceded power to the secretary, usually a slave trained as a scribe or librarian. This cultural and political transformation can be traced in the career of Marcus Tullius Tiro (94 B.C. to 4 A.D.), Cicero's confidant and amanuensis. A freedman credited with the invention of Latin shorthand (the notae Tironianae), Tiro transcribed and edited Cicero's speeches, composed, collected, and eventually published his voluminous correspondence, and organized and managed his archives and library. As his former master's fortune sank with the dying Republic, Tiro's began to rise. After Cicero's assassination, he became the orator's literary executor and biographer. His talents were always in demand under the new bureaucratic regime, and he prospered by producing popular grammars and secretarial manuals. He died a wealthy centenarian and a full Roman citizen.

In 80 BC, at the age of 26, the future Roman statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero defended one Sextus Roscius from accusations of patricide. For Cicero, the stakes were high for challenging such a strong accusation, as patricide was seen as a horrific crime in the public eye of Rome. For one, if Cicero were to lose his defense, he would be the one to blame for Roscius’ consequential harsh punishment, Poena Cullei. Reserved only for patricide, this type of sentence involved wrapping the perpetrator’s head in wolf skin and their beaten body sewn into a sack with live animals—namely snakes, dogs, chickens, and monkeys; only then was the body bag thrown into the water, preventing the traditional and honorable burial that most Romans had.1 Furthermore, Cicero decided to blame the murder on some men with close relations to Sulla, the dictator of the republic and an influential man easily able to silence him. Ultimately, the amateur lawyer won his first public case and used its high stakes to bring himself public recognition. Cicero acknowledges this in one of his works: Itaque prima causa publica pro Sex. Roscio dicta tantum commendationis habuit ut non ulla esset quae non digna nostro patrocinio videretur (“My defense of Sex. Roscius, which was the first public cause I pleaded, met with such a favorable reception, that I was looked upon as an advocate of the first class, and equal to the greatest and most important causes”).2 This fame kickstarted Cicero’s public career, facilitated his rise to consulship in 63 BC, and foreshadowed one of the most notable events of his political career: the Catilinarian conspiracy.

Pons et cella penaria – The importance of Sicily for the formation of the Roman Empire on the basis of Ciceros “In Verrem”In the year 70 BCE, one of the most renowned trials in Roman history took place: The lawsuit of Gaius Verres, former propraetor of the Roman province Sicilia. Marcus Tullius Cicero, taking up the role of the claimant in this trial, wrote a series of speeches against Verres (“In Verrem”). Therein he stated, among other things, the importance of Sicily for the Roman Empire. As the first Roman province, it introduced the Romans to a new system of governing foreign territory. It functioned as a “bridge” for the conquest of Carthage and, finally, it fed the Roman population and its army. The following paper will examine each of these three steps, as well as use them as a framework to discuss the role of Sicily for the formation of the Roman Empire.

This article is devoted to the analysis of the anthropological aspects of the concept of religio used in the well-known legacy of Marcus Tullius Cicero. Cicero’s contribution to the development of philosophical understanding of various aspects of human society is generally recognized, but one of the most valuable “pearls”, which is highly valued by modern researchers, is his analysis of the Latin word religio, which is found in his works more than 600 times. In our opinion, an important aspect of Cicero’s reflections on religion is the consideration of his literary and philosophical heritage in the context of the crucial historical and political processes that took place in the Roman Republic in the first century BC, similar to the challenges facing the modern Russian and international community. The article attempts to comprehend the Latin lexemes superstitio and sacrum, which are close in meaning to the concept of religio, which allows us more accurately to explicate this concept from its related definitions. The results of the study. Cicero draws a clear line between the concepts of religio (internal and external sincere piety), sacrum (Roman state understanding of shrines) and superstitio (false beliefs). He identifies the following main functions in the concept of religio: Ideological (uniting people on the basis of pious beliefs in common gods), ideological (everything in the world happens with the permission of the gods as the foundations of the “higher order of nature”) and socio-managerial (universal values that govern the behavior of an individual in society).

Este artigo não tem o objetivo de trazer respostas definitivas, obviamente, para a fraude contra credores, tampouco realizar estudos aprofundados sobre o vocábulo fraude – nem no Direito brasileiro, nem no Direito Comparado. Também não há a intenção de estudar a hermenêutica, a interpretação e a exegese aplicáveis. Apesar disso, alguns conceitos de fraude serão analisados, tanto no âmbito primitivo como no âmbito contemporâneo do Direito. Nuances sobre o conceito e a problemática da fraude são importantes para pensar, repensar e compreender a sua inserção na frase técnico-jurídica fraude contra credores. Nuances sobre a expressão ação pauliana, contida no título deste artigo, também são importantes para compreender os objetivos do estudo. Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 a.C.) articulou um interessante conceito de direitos e deveres, no contexto da fraude: “Embora o erro possa ser feito de duas maneiras, isto é, pela força ou pela fraude, ambas são bestiais; a fraude parece pertencer à raposa astuta, enquanto a força pertence ao leão. Apesar de ambas serem totalmente indignas do homem, a fraude é a mais desprezível. Isso porque, de todas as formas de injustiça, nenhuma é mais flagrante que a do hipócrita que, no exato momento em que é falso, faz questão de parecer virtuoso”. Este é o propósito, mesmo que singelo, deste artigo.

The heritage of the ancient Roman politician, orator and thinker Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BC – 43 BC), is considered as a set of texts that over centuries have been included in the curricula for humanities students, significantly changing the narrative tradition and detecting a way of understanding what is related to humanities. The key questions for the authors is the following: how and for what purposes was Cicero’s heritage presented to humanities students in educational texts in the first two decades of the 20th and 21st centuries? At the beginning of last century, scholars’ attention to Cicero was largely due to Augustus Samuel Wilkins (1843–1905), Paul Monroe (1869–1947) and his disciple Ellwood Cubberley (1868-1941). Many textbooks compiled by P. Monroe, A.S. Wilkins and E. Cubberley were published one after another. Thanks to the educational books of P. Monroe, A.S. Wilkins and E. Cubberley, different approaches to presenting Cicero's works for educational purposes were developed. It is these approaches that were reflected in educational books for humanists a century later. In Russian textbooks, sourcebooks, and anthologies on history of pedagogy, Cicero was mostly a figure of omission not only in the first decades, but throughout the entire 20th century. At the beginning of the 21st century, many learning books for humanities students appeared. Their authors and compilers consider Cicero as an author who left a conceptual description of pedagogical reality (a detailed description of educational process) and chose a narrative description (description of what happened through the eyes of those who take part in it). We have to regret that the Russian domestic tradition of including Cicero's heritage in the content of humanitarian education has hardly undergone any changes over a century: fragments of his works continue to be presented on a small scale, are practically not grouped according to key issues, and rarely accompanied by pedagogical commentaries. The question of why some texts were selected while others were not, can be asked to every author and compiler who included Cicero's texts in their books for humanities students. The search for answers to this “eternal question” can be associated both with the flexibility of the humanitarian curriculum, and with the personal preferences of the authors and compilers of learning books.

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;">O artigo tem como objetivo o estudo das origens e das características da representação de Marco Túlio Cícero (106-43 a.C.) nos compêndios de História Universal utilizados no Ensino Secundário durante a Primeira República do Brasil (1888-1930), bem como a utilização dessa representação na construção identitária nacional republicana brasileira no início do século XX.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span><strong><span style="font-family: ">Palavras-chave:</span></strong></span><span><span style="font-family: "> Cícero – República – Brasil.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="text-align: justify;"><strong><span style="font-family: ">Abstract:</span></strong></span><span style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: "> </span></span><span style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: " lang="EN-US">This paper aims to study the origins and characteristics of the representation of Marcus Tullius Cicero (103-46 BC) in textbooks on Universal History used in Secondary Education during the First Republic of Brazil (1889-1930), as well as use of this representation in the Brazilian republican national identity construction in early twentieth century.</span></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: justify;"><span><strong><span style="font-family: " lang="EN-US">Keywords:</span></strong></span><span><span style="font-family: " lang="EN-US"> Cicero – Republic – Brazil.</span></span></p>

<p><strong>Resumo</strong>: O presente artigo visa discutir a utilização das obras de Cícero como fonte para analisar as concepções religiosas durante o período final da República. Considera-se assim, a perspectiva dos discursos filosófico-religiosos existentes juntamente com os grupos sociais relacionados às estas vertentes intelectuais. Aborda-se também, os aspectos metodológicos de trabalho com as fontes. Para o desenvolvimento desta reflexão serão utilizadas as obras:<em> De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Legibus (Livro II) </em>e o discurso<em> De Domo Sua.</em></p><p>P<strong>alavras-chave: </strong>Cícero – Discurso Religioso – República.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p><strong>Abstract:</strong> The present paper discusses the usage of Cicero’s works as a source to analyze religious conceptions during the late Republic. It is therefore considered the prospect of philosophical and religious discourses co-existing with social groups related to these intellectual strands. We also discuss the methodological aspects of working with these sources. For the development of this reflection it will be used the following works: <em>De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Legibus (Book II) </em>and the speech<em> De Domo Sua.</em></p><p><strong>Keywords: </strong>Cicero – Religious Discourse – Republic.</p>

Marcus Tullius Cicero, born 106 B.C., has always been considered the greatest and mostcompetent orator that has ever lived. Pierre Bourdieu, a modern sociologist, has developed a theory aboutthe concept of broadened linguistic competence, stressing the necessary requirements for a speaker to beconsidered competent from the scientific point of view. The present article deals with the applicability ofBourdieu’s sociological theory, entitled : The Economy of Linguistic Exchanges”, to a Latin text by Cicero,with a view to confirming the pertinence of the ancient orator’s prestige.

Abstract Moving away from the nineteenth century’s concern with Quellenforschung, serious study of Valerius Maximus’ Facta et dicta memorabilia in the twentieth century produced a variety of different approaches to this Tiberian text of exemplary tales. One of the most interesting projects in this regard was produced by T.F. Carney, who scrutinised a key exemplar, Gaius Marius, across the work. In constructing a ‘biography’ from the exempla themselves, Carney’s labour contributed much to Roman history generally, but also pioneered a novel methodology for reading Valerius Maximus—one that was taken up and imitated by later scholars. This methodology, however, is not without problems, particularly in relation to the way that Valerius has shaped, structured, and arranged his work at the level of chapter. By building upon Carney’s methodology, but also considering the context of the individual chapters themselves, I provide in this paper a case study of the way in which Valerius writes the life of Marcus Tullius Cicero—a figure unique in the Facta et dicta memorabilia in being both exemplar and a major source for the work. In doing so, this article elucidates the process of ‘exemplary biography’.

Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? (‘Just how much longer, really, Catiline, will you abuse our patience?’). The famous incipit—‘And what are you reading, Master Buddenbrook? Ah, Cicero! A difficult text, the work of a great Roman orator. Quousque tandem, Catilina. Huh-uh-hmm, yes, I've not entirely forgotten my Latin, either’— already impressed contemporaries, including some ordinarily not so readily impressed. It rings through Sallust's version of Catiline's shadowy address to his followers, when he asks regarding the injustices they suffer (Cat. 20.9): quae quousque tandem patiemini, o fortissumi uiri? (‘Just how much longer, really, will you put up with these, o bravest men?’). More playfully, and less well-known, Sallust employed the expression again in a speech by Philippus (Hist. 1.77.17 M./67 R.): uos autem, patres conscripti, quo usque cunctando rem publicam intutam patiemini et uerbis arma temptabitis? (‘But you, members of the Senate, just how much longer will you suffer our Republic to be unsafe by your hesitation and make an attempt on arms with words?’). Soon afterwards it served Cicero's son, who, as governor of Asia, put down Hybreas fils for having dared to quote from his father's work in his presence (Sen. Suas. 7.14): ‘age’, inquit [sc. Marcus Tullius], ‘non putas me didicisse patris mei: “quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra”?’ (‘“Come now”, he said, “do you think that I do not know by heart my father's ‘Just how much longer, really, Catiline, will you abuse our patience’?”’). Just about the same time, Livy recalled it in order to colour Manlius’ exhortation of his followers (6.18.5): quousque tandem ignorabitis uires uestras, quas natura ne beluas quidem ignorare uoluit? … audendum est aliquid uniuersis aut omnia singulis patienda. quousque me circumspectabitis? (‘Just how much longer, really, will you remain ignorant of your own strength, which nature has willed even brutes to know? … We must dare all together, or else, separately, suffer all. Just how much longer will you keep looking round for me?’). Thereafter Quintilian would refer to it twice, when discussing apostrophe and rhetorical questions (Inst. 4.1.68, 9.2.7), just a couple of years before Tacitus has the maladroit Q. Haterius encourage Tiberius to seize the reins—quo usque patieris, Caesar, non adesse caput rei publicae? (‘Just how much longer, Caesar, will you suffer the absence of the head of state?’, Ann. 1.13.4); a few decades later still, Apuleius puts it into the mouth of the slave who chastises his master, now in asinine form (Met. 3.27): ‘quo usque tandem’, inquit, ‘cantherium patiemur istum paulo ante cibariis iumentorum, nunc etiam simulacris deorum infestum?’ (‘“Just how much longer, really,” he said, “will we suffer this old gelding to attack the animals’ food just a little while ago and now even the gods’ statues?”’). He trusted, no doubt, that the famous question would alert his readers more than anything to the many ‘similarities between Catiline and Lucius’, in order to have them appreciate this ‘ludicrous copy of Cicero's arch-enemy’. Some time after, and in a different corner of the Empire altogether, a teacher's bronze statue would carry the inscription: VERBACICRO | NISQVOVSQ | TANDEMABVTE | RECATELINAPA | TIENTIANOS | TRA.

The Leichhardt Highway is a six hundred-kilometre stretch of sealed inland road that joins the Australian Queensland border town of Goondiwindi with the Capricorn Highway, just south of the Tropic of Capricorn. Named after the young Prussian naturalist Ludwig Leichhardt, part of this roadway follows the route his party took as they crossed northern Australia from Morton Bay (Brisbane) to Port Essington (near Darwin). Ignoring the usual colonial practice of honouring the powerful and aristocratic, Leichhardt named the noteworthy features along this route after his supporters and fellow expeditioners. Many of these names are still in use and a series of public monuments have also been erected in the intervening century and a half to commemorate this journey. Unlike Leichhardt, who survived his epic trip, some contemporary travellers who navigate the remote roadway named in his honour do not arrive at their final destinations. Memorials to these violently interrupted lives line the highway, many enigmatically located in places where there is no obvious explanation for the lethal violence that occurred there. This examination profiles the memorials along Leichhardt’s highway as Gothic practice, in order to illuminate some of the uncanny paradoxes around public memorials, as well as the loaded emotional terrain such commemorative practices may inhabit. All humans know that death awaits them (Morell). Yet, despite this, and the unprecedented torrent of images of death and dying saturating news, television, and social media (Duwe; Sumiala; Bisceglio), Gorer’s mid-century ideas about the denial of death and Becker’s 1973 Pulitzer prize-winning description of the purpose of human civilization as a defence against this knowledge remains current in the contemporary trope that individuals (at least in the West) deny their mortality. Contributing to this enigmatic situation is how many deny the realities of aging and bodily decay—the promise of the “life extension” industries (Hall)—and are shielded from death by hospitals, palliative care providers, and the multimillion dollar funeral industry (Kiernan). Drawing on Piatti-Farnell’s concept of popular culture artefacts as “haunted/haunting” texts, the below describes how memorials to the dead can powerfully reconnect those who experience them with death’s reality, by providing an “encrypted passageway through which the dead re-join the living in a responsive cycle of exchange and experience” (Piatti-Farnell). While certainly very different to the “sublime” iconic Gothic structure, the Gothic ruin that Summers argued could be seen as “a sacred relic, a memorial, a symbol of infinite sadness, of tenderest sensibility and regret” (407), these memorials do function in both this way as melancholy/regret-inducing relics as well as in Piatti-Farnell’s sense of bringing the dead into everyday consciousness. Such memorialising activity also evokes one of Spooner’s features of the Gothic, by acknowledging “the legacies of the past and its burdens on the present” (8).Ludwig Leichhardt and His HighwayWhen Leichhardt returned to Sydney in 1846 from his 18-month journey across northern Australia, he was greeted with surprise and then acclaim. Having mounted his expedition without any backing from influential figures in the colony, his party was presumed lost only weeks after its departure. Yet, once Leichhardt and almost all his expedition returned, he was hailed “Prince of Explorers” (Erdos). When awarding him a significant purse raised by public subscription, then Speaker of the Legislative Council voiced what he believed would be the explorer’s lasting memorial —the public memory of his achievement: “the undying glory of having your name enrolled amongst those of the great men whose genius and enterprise have impelled them to seek for fame in the prosecution of geographical science” (ctd. Leichhardt 539). Despite this acclaim, Leichhardt was a controversial figure in his day; his future prestige not enhanced by his Prussian/Germanic background or his disappearance two years later attempting to cross the continent. What troubled the colonial political class, however, was his transgressive act of naming features along his route after commoners rather than the colony’s aristocrats. Today, the Leichhardt Highway closely follows Leichhardt’s 1844-45 route for some 130 kilometres from Miles, north through Wandoan to Taroom. In the first weeks of his journey, Leichhardt named 16 features in this area: 6 of the more major of these after the men in his party—including the Aboriginal man ‘Charley’ and boy John Murphy—4 more after the tradesmen and other non-aristocratic sponsors of his venture, and the remainder either in memory of the journey’s quotidian events or natural features there found. What we now accept as traditional memorialising practice could in this case be termed as Gothic, in that it upset the rational, normal order of its day, and by honouring humble shopkeepers, blacksmiths and Indigenous individuals, revealed the “disturbance and ambivalence” (Botting 4) that underlay colonial class relations (Macintyre). On 1 December 1844, Leichhardt also memorialised his own past, referencing the Gothic in naming a watercourse The Creek of the Ruined Castles due to the “high sandstone rocks, fissured and broken like pillars and walls and the high gates of the ruined castles of Germany” (57). Leichhardt also disturbed and disfigured the nature he so admired, famously carving his initials deep into trees along his route—a number of which still exist, including the so-called Leichhardt Tree, a large coolibah in Taroom’s main street. Leichhardt also wrote his own memorial, keeping detailed records of his experiences—both good and more regretful—in the form of field books, notebooks and letters, with his major volume about this expedition published in London in 1847. Leichhardt’s journey has since been memorialised in various ways along the route. The Leichhardt Tree has been further defaced with numerous plaques nailed into its ancient bark, and the town’s federal government-funded Bicentennial project raised a formal memorial—a large sandstone slab laid with three bronze plaques—in the newly-named Ludwig Leichhardt Park. Leichhardt’s name also adorns many sites both along, and outside, the routes of his expeditions. While these fittingly include natural features such as the Leichhardt River in north-west Queensland (named in 1856 by Augustus Gregory who crossed it by searching for traces of the explorer’s ill-fated 1848 expedition), there are also many businesses across Queensland and the Northern Territory less appropriately carrying his name. More somber monuments to Leichhardt’s legacy also resulted from this journey. The first of these was the white settlement that followed his declaration that the countryside he moved through was well endowed with fertile soils. With squatters and settlers moving in and land taken up before Leichhardt had even arrived back in Sydney, the local Yeeman people were displaced, mistreated and completely eradicated within a decade (Elder). Mid-twentieth century, Patrick White’s literary reincarnation, Voss of the eponymous novel, and paintings by Sidney Nolan and Albert Tucker have enshrined in popular memory not only the difficult (and often described as Gothic) nature of the landscape through which Leichhardt travelled (Adams; Mollinson, and Bonham), but also the distinctive and contrary blend of intelligence, spiritual mysticism, recklessness, and stoicism Leichhardt brought to his task. Roadside Memorials Today, the Leichhardt Highway is also lined with a series of roadside shrines to those who have died much more recently. While, like centotaphs, tombstones, and cemeteries, these memorialise the dead, they differ in usually marking the exact location that death occurred. In 43 BC, Cicero articulated the idea of the dead living in memory, “The life of the dead consists in the recollection cherished of them by the living” (93), yet Nelson is one of very few contemporary writers to link roadside memorials to elements of Gothic sensibility. Such constructions can, however, be described as Gothic, in that they make the roadway unfamiliar by inscribing onto it the memory of corporeal trauma and, in the process, re-creating their locations as vivid sites of pain and suffering. These are also enigmatic sites. Traffic levels are generally low along the flat or gently undulating terrain and many of these memorials are located in locations where there is no obvious explanation for the violence that occurred there. They are loci of contradictions, in that they are both more private than other memorials, in being designed, and often made and erected, by family and friends of the deceased, and yet more public, visible to all who pass by (Campbell). Cemeteries are set apart from their surroundings; the roadside memorial is, in contrast, usually in open view along a thoroughfare. In further contrast to cemeteries, which contain many relatively standardised gravesites, individual roadside memorials encapsulate and express not only the vivid grief of family and friends but also—when they include vehicle wreckage or personal artefacts from the fatal incident—provide concrete evidence of the trauma that occurred. While the majority of individuals interned in cemeteries are long dead, roadside memorials mark relatively contemporary deaths, some so recent that there may still be tyre marks, debris and bloodstains marking the scene. In 2008, when I was regularly travelling this roadway, I documented, and researched, the six then extant memorial sites that marked the locations of ten fatalities from 1999 to 2006. (These were all still in place in mid-2014.) The fatal incidents are very diverse. While half involved trucks and/or road trains, at least three were single vehicle incidents, and the deceased ranged from 13 to 84 years of age. Excell argues that scholarship on roadside memorials should focus on “addressing the diversity of the material culture” (‘Contemporary Deathscapes’) and, in these terms, the Leichhardt Highway memorials vary from simple crosses to complex installations. All include crosses (mostly, but not exclusively, white), and almost all are inscribed with the name and birth/death dates of the deceased. Most include flowers or other plants (sometimes fresh but more often plastic), but sometimes also a range of relics from the crash and/or personal artefacts. These are, thus, unsettling sights, not least in the striking contrast they provide with the highway and surrounding road reserve. The specific location is a key component of their ability to re-sensitise viewers to the dangers of the route they are travelling. The first memorial travelling northwards, for instance, is situated at the very point at which the highway begins, some 18 kilometres from Goondiwindi. Two small white crosses decorated with plastic flowers are set poignantly close together. The inscriptions can also function as a means of mobilising connection with these dead strangers—a way of building Secomb’s “haunted community”, whereby community in the post-colonial age can only be built once past “murderous death” (131) is acknowledged. This memorial is inscribed with “Cec Hann 06 / A Good Bloke / A Good hoarseman [sic]” and “Pat Hann / A Good Woman” to tragically commemorate the deaths of an 84-year-old man and his 79-year-old wife from South Australia who died in the early afternoon of 5 June 2006 when their Ford Falcon, towing a caravan, pulled onto the highway and was hit by a prime mover pulling two trailers (Queensland Police, ‘Double Fatality’; Jones, and McColl). Further north along the highway are two memorials marking the most inexplicable of road deaths: the single vehicle fatality (Connolly, Cullen, and McTigue). Darren Ammenhauser, aged 29, is remembered with a single white cross with flowers and plaque attached to a post, inscribed hopefully, “Darren Ammenhauser 1971-2000 At Rest.” Further again, at Billa Billa Creek, a beautifully crafted metal cross attached to a fence is inscribed with the text, “Kenneth J. Forrester / RIP Jack / 21.10.25 – 27.4.05” marking the death of the 79-year-old driver whose vehicle veered off the highway to collide with a culvert on the creek. It was reported that the vehicle rolled over several times before coming to rest on its wheels and that Forrester was dead when the police arrived (Queensland Police, ‘Fatal Traffic Incident’). More complex memorials recollect both single and multiple deaths. One, set on both sides of the road, maps the physical trajectory of the fatal smash. This memorial comprises white crosses on both sides of road, attached to a tree on one side, and a number of ancillary sites including damaged tyres with crosses placed inside them on both sides of the road. Simple inscriptions relay the inability of such words to express real grief: “Gary (Gazza) Stevens / Sadly missed” and “Gary (Gazza) Stevens / Sadly missed / Forever in our hearts.” The oldest and most complex memorial on the route, commemorating the death of four individuals on 18 June 1999, is also situated on both sides of the road, marking the collision of two vehicles travelling in opposite directions. One memorial to a 62-year-old man comprises a cross with flowers, personal and automotive relics, and a plaque set inside a wooden fence and simply inscribed “John Henry Keenan / 23-11-1936–18-06-1999”. The second memorial contains three white crosses set side-by-side, together with flowers and relics, and reveals that members of three generations of the same family died at this location: “Raymond Campbell ‘Butch’ / 26-3-67–18-6-99” (32 years of age), “Lorraine Margaret Campbell ‘Lloydie’ / 29-11-46–18-6-99” (53 years), and “Raymond Jon Campbell RJ / 28-1-86–18-6-99” (13 years). The final memorial on this stretch of highway is dedicated to Jason John Zupp of Toowoomba who died two weeks before Christmas 2005. This consists of a white cross, decorated with flowers and inscribed: “Jason John Zupp / Loved & missed by all”—a phrase echoed in his newspaper obituary. The police media statement noted that, “at 11.24pm a prime mover carrying four empty trailers [stacked two high] has rolled on the Leichhardt Highway 17km north of Taroom” (Queensland Police, ‘Fatal Truck Accident’). The roadside memorial was placed alongside a ditch on a straight stretch of road where the body was found. The coroner’s report adds the following chilling information: “Mr Zupp was thrown out of the cabin and his body was found near the cabin. There is no evidence whatsoever that he had applied the brakes or in any way tried to prevent the crash … Jason was not wearing his seatbelt” (Cornack 5, 6). Cornack also remarked the truck was over length, the brakes had not been properly adjusted, and the trip that Zupp had undertaken could not been lawfully completed according to fatigue management regulations then in place (8). Although poignant and highly visible due to these memorials, these deaths form a small part of Australia’s road toll, and underscore our ambivalent relationship with the automobile, where road death is accepted as a necessary side-effect of the freedom of movement the technology offers (Ladd). These memorials thus animate highways as Gothic landscapes due to the “multifaceted” (Haider 56) nature of the fear, terror and horror their acknowledgement can bring. Since 1981, there have been, for instance, between some 1,600 and 3,300 road deaths each year in Australia and, while there is evidence of a long term downward trend, the number of deaths per annum has not changed markedly since 1991 (DITRDLG 1, 2), and has risen in some years since then. The U.S.A. marked its millionth road death in 1951 (Ladd) along the way to over 3,000,000 during the 20th century (Advocates). These deaths are far reaching, with U.K. research suggesting that each death there leaves an average of 6 people significantly affected, and that there are some 10 to 20 per cent of mourners who experience more complicated grief and longer term negative affects during this difficult time (‘Pathways Through Grief’). As the placing of roadside memorials has become a common occurrence the world over (Klaassens, Groote, and Vanclay; Grider; Cohen), these are now considered, in MacConville’s opinion, not only “an appropriate, but also an expected response to tragedy”. Hockey and Draper have explored the therapeutic value of the maintenance of “‘continuing bonds’ between the living and the dead” (3). This is, however, only one explanation for the reasons that individuals erect roadside memorials with research suggesting roadside memorials perform two main purposes in their linking of the past with the present—as not only sites of grieving and remembrance, but also of warning (Hartig, and Dunn; Everett; Excell, Roadside Memorials; MacConville). Clark adds that by “localis[ing] and personalis[ing] the road dead,” roadside memorials raise the profile of road trauma by connecting the emotionless statistics of road death directly to individual tragedy. They, thus, transform the highway into not only into a site of past horror, but one in which pain and terror could still happen, and happen at any moment. Despite their increasing commonality and their recognition as cultural artefacts, these memorials thus occupy “an uncomfortable place” both in terms of public policy and for some individuals (Lowe). While in some states of the U.S.A. and in Ireland the erection of such memorials is facilitated by local authorities as components of road safety campaigns, in the U.K. there appears to be “a growing official opposition to the erection of memorials” (MacConville). Criticism has focused on the dangers (of distraction and obstruction) these structures pose to passing traffic and pedestrians, while others protest their erection on aesthetic grounds and even claim memorials can lower property values (Everett). While many ascertain a sense of hope and purpose in the physical act of creating such shrines (see, for instance, Grider; Davies), they form an uncanny presence along the highway and can provide dangerous psychological territory for the viewer (Brien). Alongside the townships, tourist sites, motels, and petrol stations vying to attract customers, they stain the roadway with the unmistakable sign that a violent death has happened—bringing death, and the dead, to the fore as a component of these journeys, and destabilising prominent cultural narratives of technological progress and safety (Richter, Barach, Ben-Michael, and Berman).Conclusion This investigation has followed Goddu who proposes that a Gothic text “registers its culture’s contradictions” (3) and, in profiling these memorials as “intimately connected to the culture that produces them” (Goddu 3) has proposed memorials as Gothic artefacts that can both disturb and reveal. Roadside memorials are, indeed, so loaded with emotional content that their close contemplation can be traumatising (Brien), yet they are inescapable while navigating the roadway. Part of their power resides in their ability to re-animate those persons killed in these violent in the minds of those viewing these memorials. In this way, these individuals are reincarnated as ghostly presences along the highway, forming channels via which the traveller can not only make human contact with the dead, but also come to recognise and ponder their own sense of mortality. While roadside memorials are thus like civic war memorials in bringing untimely death to the forefront of public view, roadside memorials provide a much more raw expression of the chaotic, anarchic and traumatic moment that separates the world of the living from that of the dead. While traditional memorials—such as those dedicated by, and to, Leichhardt—moreover, pay homage to the vitality of the lives of those they commemorate, roadside memorials not only acknowledge the alarming circumstances of unexpected death but also stand testament to the power of the paradox of the incontrovertibility of sudden death versus our lack of ability to postpone it. In this way, further research into these and other examples of Gothic memorialising practice has much to offer various areas of cultural study in Australia.ReferencesAdams, Brian. Sidney Nolan: Such Is Life. Hawthorn, Vic.: Hutchinson, 1987. Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety. “Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities & Fatality Rate: 1899-2003.” 2004. Becker, Ernest. The Denial of Death. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1973. Bisceglio, Paul. “How Social Media Is Changing the Way We Approach Death.” The Atlantic 20 Aug. 2013. Botting, Fred. Gothic: The New Critical Idiom. 2nd edition. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2014. Brien, Donna Lee. “Looking at Death with Writers’ Eyes: Developing Protocols for Utilising Roadside Memorials in Creative Writing Classes.” Roadside Memorials. Ed. Jennifer Clark. Armidale, NSW: EMU Press, 2006. 208–216. Campbell, Elaine. “Public Sphere as Assemblage: The Cultural Politics of Roadside Memorialization.” The British Journal of Sociology 64.3 (2013): 526–547. Cicero, Marcus Tullius. The Orations of Marcus Tullius Cicero. 43 BC. Trans. C. D. Yonge. London: George Bell & Sons, 1903. Clark, Jennifer. “But Statistics Don’t Ride Skateboards, They Don’t Have Nicknames Like ‘Champ’: Personalising the Road Dead with Roadside Memorials.” 7th International Conference on the Social Context of Death, Dying and Disposal. Bath, UK: University of Bath, 2005. Cohen, Erik. “Roadside Memorials in Northeastern Thailand.” OMEGA: Journal of Death and Dying 66.4 (2012–13): 343–363. Connolly, John F., Anne Cullen, and Orfhlaith McTigue. “Single Road Traffic Deaths: Accident or Suicide?” Crisis: The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention 16.2 (1995): 85–89. Cornack [Coroner]. Transcript of Proceedings. In The Matter of an Inquest into the Cause and Circumstances Surrounding the Death of Jason John Zupp. Towoomba, Qld.: Coroners Court. 12 Oct. 2007. Davies, Douglas. “Locating Hope: The Dynamics of Memorial Sites.” 6th International Conference on the Social Context of Death, Dying and Disposal. York, UK: University of York, 2002. Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government [DITRDLG]. Road Deaths Australia: 2007 Statistical Summary. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2008. Duwe, Grant. “Body-count Journalism: The Presentation of Mass Murder in the News Media.” Homicide Studies 4 (2000): 364–399. Elder, Bruce. Blood on the Wattle: Massacres and Maltreatment of Aboriginal Australians since 1788. Sydney: New Holland, 1998. Erdos, Renee. “Leichhardt, Friedrich Wilhelm Ludwig (1813-1848).” Australian Dictionary of Biography Online Edition. Melbourne: Melbourne UP, 1967. Everett, Holly. Roadside Crosses in Contemporary Memorial Culture. Austin: Texas UP, 2002. Excell, Gerri. “Roadside Memorials in the UK.” Unpublished MA thesis. Reading: University of Reading, 2004. ———. “Contemporary Deathscapes: A Comparative Analysis of the Material Culture of Roadside Memorials in the US, Australia and the UK.” 7th International Conference on the Social Context of Death, Dying and Disposal. Bath, UK: University of Bath, 2005. Goddu, Teresa A. Gothic America: Narrative, History, and Nation. New York: Columbia UP, 2007. Gorer, Geoffrey. “The Pornography of Death.” Encounter V.4 (1955): 49–52. Grider, Sylvia. “Spontaneous Shrines: A Modern Response to Tragedy and Disaster.” New Directions in Folklore (5 Oct. 2001). Haider, Amna. “War Trauma and Gothic Landscapes of Dispossession and Dislocation in Pat Barker’s Regeneration Trilogy.” Gothic Studies 14.2 (2012): 55–73. Hall, Stephen S. Merchants of Immortality: Chasing the Dream of Human Life Extension. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, Harcourt, 2003. Hartig, Kate V., and Kevin M. Dunn. “Roadside Memorials: Interpreting New Deathscapes in Newcastle, New South Wales.” Australian Geographical Studies 36 (1998): 5–20. Hockey, Jenny, and Janet Draper. “Beyond the Womb and the Tomb: Identity, (Dis)embodiment and the Life Course.” Body & Society 11.2 (2005): 41–57. Online version: 1–25. Jones, Ian, and Kaye McColl. (2006) “Highway Tragedy.” Goondiwindi Argus 9 Jun. 2006. Kiernan, Stephen P. “The Transformation of Death in America.” Final Acts: Death, Dying, and the Choices We Make. Eds. Nan Bauer-Maglin, and Donna Perry. Rutgers University: Rutgers UP, 2010. 163–182. Klaassens, M., P.D. Groote, and F.M. Vanclay. “Expressions of Private Mourning in Public Space: The Evolving Structure of Spontaneous and Permanent Roadside Memorials in the Netherlands.” Death Studies 37.2 (2013): 145–171. Ladd, Brian. Autophobia: Love and Hate in the Automotive Age. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2008. Leichhardt, Ludwig. Journal of an Overland Expedition of Australia from Moreton Bay to Port Essington, A Distance of Upwards of 3000 Miles during the Years 1844–1845. London, T & W Boone, 1847. Facsimile ed. Sydney: Macarthur Press, n.d. Lowe, Tim. “Roadside Memorials in South Eastern Australia.” 7th International Conference on the Social Context of Death, Dying and Disposal. Bath, UK: University of Bath, 2005. MacConville, Una. “Roadside Memorials.” Bath, UK: Centre for Death & Society, Department of Social and Policy Sciences, University of Bath, 2007. Macintyre, Stuart. “The Making of the Australian Working Class: An Historiographical Survey.” Historical Studies 18.71 (1978): 233–253. Mollinson, James, and Nicholas Bonham. Tucker. South Melbourne: Macmillan Company of Australia, and Australian National Gallery, 1982. Morell, Virginia. “Mournful Creatures.” Lapham’s Quarterly 6.4 (2013): 200–208. Nelson, Victoria. Gothicka: Vampire Heroes, Human Gods, and the New Supernatural. Harvard University: Harvard UP, 2012. “Pathways through Grief.” 1st National Conference on Bereavement in a Healthcare Setting. Dundee, 1–2 Sep. 2008. Piatti-Farnell, Lorna. “Words from the Culinary Crypt: Reading the Recipe as a Haunted/Haunting Text.” M/C Journal 16.3 (2013). Queensland Police. “Fatal Traffic Incident, Goondiwindi [Media Advisory].” 27 Apr. 2005. ———. “Fatal Truck Accident, Taroom.” Media release. 11 Dec. 2005. ———. “Double Fatality, Goondiwindi.” Media release. 5 Jun. 2006. Richter, E. D., P. Barach, E. Ben-Michael, and T. Berman. “Death and Injury from Motor Vehicle Crashes: A Public Health Failure, Not an Achievement.” Injury Prevention 7 (2001): 176–178. Secomb, Linnell. “Haunted Community.” The Politics of Community. Ed. Michael Strysick. Aurora, Co: Davies Group, 2002. 131–150. Spooner, Catherine. Contemporary Gothic. London: Reaktion, 2006.