Preamble

We are now at our second defining point in the history of Roman human rights. The dominant force is Cicero. He takes almost complete possession of the words humanitas and humanus and also supplies a wealth of material in the unlabelled form.¹ There is no serious challenger to Cicero.

A theory that crops up periodically sees Cicero’s concept of humanitas as a distinct advance on the Panaetius-Aemilianus model. Cicero, it is said, moves from an elitist, ethical—political ideal of the nobility to universalism which is the true humanity that embraced all members of the human race. But, so the theory goes on to say, that position was shortlived, because with Cicero’s death the word lost its vitality and its survival in later writers is only a shadow.⁵ The theory does not stand up under scrutiny. Cicero, and Seneca after him, should simply be seen as continuators, albeit with substantial revisions and amplifications, of humanitas Romana. Even the new image of humanitas in the Principate kept in touch with its origins.

It is not proposed to make much use of the many Ciceronian uses of humanitas falling under the â€?kindly, courteous’ stereotype.⁶ Such uses certainly reinforce the basic importance of humanitas as a paideia- induced mindset. They also emphasise the liberal climate that gave the Late Republic its leading role in the promotion of human rights. But the message does not need detailed reiteration. The way forward is through certain dynamic themes that show Cicero in action. Three themes will be addressed. They are, first, universalism which can also be described as humanitas in its external connotations. Second, punishment with special reference to the death sentence and voluntary exile. And third, a discussion of humanitas and the law. Although all Ciceronian genres are taken under advisement, the court speeches are of special value. It is in the cut, thrust and parry of court situations⁷ that Cicero takes human rights out of the ivory tower.