Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T06:54:02.133Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Economic Dimension of Cicero's Political Thought: Property and State*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2009

Neal Wood
Neal Wood
Affiliation:
York University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cicero's great reputation as a political thinker has sharply declined in the twentieth century. Commentators, if treating him at all, usually focus briefly on his ethical ideas and neglect the significant economic dimension of his thought. In view of the importance of the conception of property in the history of political theory. Cicero deserves to be taken more seriously today by political scientists. An “economic individualist” who recommended the enlightened pursuit of self-interest and defended property differentials, he was the first major political thinker to conceive of the protection of private property as the primary purpose of the state.

Résumé

La grande réputation de Cicéron en tant que penseur politique a déclinée abruptement au vingtième siècle. D'autre part, quand sa pensée est traitée, on met l'accent sur ses idées éthiques et on néglige I'importance de sa dimension économique. En tenant compte de l'importance de la conception de propriété dans l'histoire de la théorie politique, Cicéron mérite d'être considéré sérieusement par les politologues. Il était un « individualiste économique » qui conseillait la poursuite éclairée des intérêts individuels en prenant part pour les différences face à la propriété. Il fut le premier grand politologue à concevoir la protection de la propriété privée comme la mission fondamentale de I'Etat.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 16 , Issue 4 , December 1983 , pp. 739 - 756
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For example, Marx, Karl, “Notebooks on Epicurean Philosophy” (1839), in Marx, and Engels, , Collected Works, Vol. 1 (New York: International Publishers, 1975), 472Google Scholar: Cicero “ knew as little about philosophy as about the president of the United States of North America.” Sir Frederick Pollock, Introduction to the History of the Science of Politics (1890), quoted in Willoughby, W. W., The Political Theories of the Ancient World (New York: Macmillan, 1903), 274Google Scholar: “ Nobody that I know of has yet succeeded in discovering a new idea in the whole of Cicero's philosophical and semi-philosophical writings.” Sibley, Mulford Q., Political Ideas and Ideologies(New York: Harper & Row, 1970), 125: “ Cicero was neither an original nor a particularly profound social and political thinker.” Similar evaluations can be found in practically all the standard commentaries.Google Scholar

2 The nearest thing to a book in English on Cicero's political thought is the lengthy introduction by George Holland Sabine and Stanley Bamey Smith to their translation of Cicero's De Re Publica, entitled On the Commonwealth (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1929), 1–102Google Scholar, reprinted in 1976 by the Bobbs-Merrill Co. in the Library of Liberal Arts. The last book in any language appears to be Friedrich Cauer, Ciceros politisches Denken (Berlin: Wiedmann, 1903).Google Scholar

3 On Cicero's influence consult the useful summaries in Lacey, W. K., Cicero and the End of the Roman Republic (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1978)Google Scholar: and Rawson, Elizabeth, Cicero, A Portrait (London: Allen Lane, 1975).Google Scholar

4 Barker, Ernest (ed.), From Alexander to Constantine: Passages and Documents Illustrating the History of Social and Political Ideas, 336 B.C.-A.D. 337 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1956), 185–204Google Scholar; Cairns, Huntington, Legal Philosophy from Plato to Hegel (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1949), 127–62Google Scholar; , R. W. and , A. J.Carlyle, , A History of Medieval Political Thought in the West, Vol. 1 (Edinburgh and London: Blackwood, 1903), 1–18Google Scholar; Catlin, George, The Story of the Political Philosophers (1st ed.; New York and London: McGraw-Hill, 1939), 119–21Google Scholar; Coker, F. W., Readings in Political Philosophy (rev. ed.; New York: Macmillan, 1938), 129–52Google Scholar; Cook, T. I., History of Political Philosophy: From Plato to Burke (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1937), 143–49Google Scholar; dimming, R. D., Human Nature and History: A Study of the Development of Liberal Political Thought (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press), 1969Google Scholar, esp. Vol. 1, chaps. 7–9, and Vol. 2, pp. 3, 11, 13, 17, 20, 64–65, 134–37, 331; Dunning, W. A., A History of Political Theories, Vol. 1 (New York and London: Macmillan, 1935), 118–25Google Scholar; Foster, M. B. (ed.), Masters of Political Thought, Vol. 1 (Boston and New York: Houghton, Mifflin, 1941), 179–95Google Scholar; Gettell, R. G., History of Political Thought (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1924), 74–76Google Scholar; Hacker, Andrew, Political Theory: Philosophy, Ideology, Science (New York: Macmillan, 1961)Google Scholar; Hallowell, J. H., Main Currents in Modern Political Thought (New York: Holt, 1950), 18Google Scholar; Harmon, M. Judd, Political Thought from Plato to the Present (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964), 84–86Google Scholar; Holton, J. E., “Marcus Tullius Cicero,” in Strauss, Leo and Cropsey, Joseph (eds.), History of Political Philosophy (2nd ed.; Chicago: Rand McNally, 1972), 130–50Google Scholar; Mcllwain, C. H., The Growth of Political Thought in the West: From the Greeks to the End of the Middle Ages (New York: Macmillan, 1932), 114–18Google Scholar; Morris, Christopher, Western Political Thought, Vol. 1 (London: Longmans, 1967), 140–65Google Scholar; Sabine, George H., A History of Political Theory (3rded.; New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1961), 159–73Google Scholar; Sabine, and Smith, , On the Commonwealth, 1–102Google Scholar; Sibley, , Political Ideas and Ideologies, 125–30Google Scholar; Watkins, Frederick, The Political Tradition of the West: A Study in the Development of Modern Liberalism (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1948)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Willoughby, Political Theories of the Ancient World, 274–89; Wiser, J. L., Political Philosophy: A History of the Search for order (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1983), 74,77,79,93, 101, 122Google Scholar; Wolin, Sheldon, Politics and Vision: Continuity and Innovation in Western Political Thought (Boston: Little, Brown, 1960), 86–91.Google Scholar

Hacker and Watkins do not refer to Cicero. Only Barker, Cumming, and Sibley discuss Cicero on property and state. The reason so many commentators overlook Cicero's views on property and state seems to be due to their neglect of De Officiis. Because of this they also miss other crucial elements of Cicero's political thought including his conception of moral duties, attitude toward labour, distinction between state and government, notion of government as a trust, and doctrine of tyrannicide. Cumming's perceptive treatment of Cicero is clearly an exception to the other commentaries, and it is one to which I am indebted throughout the following, although we may not always be in agreement.

5 This article is based upon a book I am writing on Cicero's social and political thought.

6 For example, see Rawson, Elizabeth, “The Ciceronian Aristocracy and Its Properties,” in Finley, M. I. (ed.), Studies in Roman Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), 85–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Her views should be supplemented by the valuable comments of Treggiari, Susan, “Sentiment and Property: Some Roman Attitudes,” in Parel, Anthony and Flanagan, Thomas (eds.), Theories of Property: Aristotle to the Present (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1979), 53–85. Also of importance areGoogle Scholar: D'Arms, John H., Commerce and Social Standing in Ancient Rome (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981), chaps. 2–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Frier, Bruce W., Landlords and Tenants in Imperial Rome (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980), esp. 23–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In addition several recent biographical studies are useful: Bailey, D. R. Shackleton, Cicero (London: Duckworth, 1971); Lacey, CiceroGoogle Scholar; Mitchell, T. N., Cicero: The Ascending Years (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1979)Google Scholar; Rawson, , Cicero: A Portrait (London: A. Lane, 1975). Finally, an obvious source is Cicero's correspondence, all of which has now been translated and edited by Professor Shackleton Bailey in readily available Penguin editions.Google Scholar

7 Finley, M. I., The Ancient Economy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973), 53.Google Scholar

8 Off. I, 11–12. All translations of Cicero's works are those of the Loeb Classical Library, with occasional slight changes. All citations to his works are reference to books and sections.

9 Ibid., 22.

10 Ibid., 51.

11 Ibid., 21.

12 Ibid., III, 21–24.

13 Ibid., 54–67.

14 Top. 90.

15 Off. I, 15, 20, 23, 42–45.

16 Ibid., II. 73, 76–87, III, 21–23, Leg. Agr. II, 10–16, 71, 102. Sest. 103.

17 Rep. I, 49. Leg. II, 59. Fin. III, 67.

18 Rep. I, 27.

19 Brunt, Peter, Social Conflicts in the Roman Republic (London: Chatto and Windus, 1971), 128.Google Scholar

20 Off. I, 20.

21 Ibid., 11, 64.

22 Ibid., 87.

23 Ibid., 1, 25, 92; II, 64.

24 Ibid., III, 42. Hobbes, Thomas, The Elements of Law Natural and Politic, ed. by Tonnies, Ferdinand, Introduction by Goldsmith, M. M. (2nd ed.; London: Cass, 1969), 47–48.Google Scholar

25 For a brief discussion of Locke's possible intellectual debt to Cicero, see my book, The Politics of Locke's Philosophy: A Social Study of “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding” (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983), chap. 2.Google Scholar

26 On Cicero's individualism see Cumming, Human Nature and History, Vol. 2, pp. 3, 11, 13, 17, 20, 25, 64–65, 331.

27 Hegel, , Philosophy of History, trans by Sibree, J. (New York: Collier, 1912), 397.Google Scholar

28 Gelzer, Matthias, The Roman Nobility, trans, by Seager, Robin (Oxford: Blackwell, 1975), 136–37. Gelzer's book was first published in 1910.Google Scholar

29 Macpherson, C. B., The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962).Google Scholar

30 On this aspect of Hobbes, see my “Thomas Hobbes and the Crisis of the English Aristocracy,” History of Political Thought 1 (1980), 437–52. On the other hand, Locke's outlook was intimately related to emergent agrarian capitalism in late Stuart England. See Wood, The Politics of Locke's Philosophy, and forthcoming volume. John Locke and Agrarian Capitalism, to be published by the University of California Press.

31 Gelzer, The Roman Nobility, 4.

32 Smith, Sir Thomas, De Republica Anglorum, ed. by Dewar, Mary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 76.Google Scholar

33 Fink, Z. S., The Classical Republicans: An Essay in the Recovery of a Pattern of Thought in Seventeenth-Century England (2nd ed.; Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1962)Google Scholar; Pocock, J. G. A., The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975).Google Scholar

34 See Wood, The Politics of Locke's Philosophy, chap. 2.

35 Gay, Peter, The Enlightenment: An Interpretation, Vol. 1 (New York: Knopf, 1966), passim.Google Scholar

36 Reinhold, Meyer, “Eighteenth-Century American Political Thought,” in Bolgar, R. R. (ed.), Classical Influences on Western Thought A. D. 1650–1870 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 229.Google Scholar

37 Rep. 1, 12, 33, 36, 38.

38 Ibid., 39. “… coetus multitudinis inris consensu et ntilitalis communione societas.”

39 Ibid.. 49.

40 Cltient. 146–47.

41 Rep. II, 70: III. 43–45, Leg. II, 12–13.

42 For example. Off. II, 2, 23–28: III, 83–85.

43 Par. Stoic. 27.

44 Invent. 1. 2. Rep. I. 40.

45 Rep. I, 1. 39. Off. I, 50, 158; II, 73.

46 Rep. 1, I.

47 Off. I, 54.

48 Gelzer, The Roman Nobility, 137 and n. 615.

49 Invent. II, 168–69.

50 Leg. II, 11.

51 Ibid., Ill, 8.

52 Off. II, 41–42.

53 Ibid., 15.

54 Esp. ibid., III, 34–35.

55 A summary of various points made in ibid., I, esp. I, 15, 20. 33. 42–45.

56 Caec. 70–75.

57 Top. II, 9: Dom. 33.

58 Off. II, 73.

59 Ibid., 78.

60 One of the most recent commentators to recognize this significant characteristic of Cicero's political thought is G. E. M. de Ste. Croix, , The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World: From the Archaic Age to the Arab Conquests (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1981): “No surviving Greek writer is quite as explicit about the overriding importance of property rights as Cicero, the earliest known to me in a long line of thinkers, extending into modern times, who have seen the protection of private property rights as the prime function of the state” (426).Google Scholar

61 Rep. I, 42; III, 47.

62 Ibid., 1, 43, 47–50, 53, 65–69. See Wirszubski, Ch., Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome During the Late Republic and Early Principate (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968), 1–96; and Mitchell, Cicero: The Ascending Years, 198–200.Google Scholar

63 Rep. I, 42, 45, 69–70; II, 41, 57.

64 Plato, Laws lll-IV; Aristotle, Politics, 1293a-1296-b, 1318b-1319a, 1320b: Polybius, The Histories VI.

65 On the conservatism of the mixed constitution, see Aalders, G. J. D.. Political Thought in Hellenistic Times (Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1975), 105–12: de Ste. Croix, The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World. 74–76Google Scholar: , E. M. and Wood, Neal. Class Ideology and Ancient Political Theory: Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle in Social Context (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978), 241–45.Google Scholar

66 Rep. II, 39–40.

67 Leg. III, 38–39.

68 For an excellent summary of Cicero's economic recommendations, see Mitchell, Cicero: The Ascending Years, 200–05.

69 Off. II, 73–85.

70 Ibid., 73–74.

71 Rep. IV, 7.

72 Alt. 114 (V.21) 220; 115 (VI.1) 226: 116 (VI.2) 240–41; 117 (VI.3) 245. The notational system here and in nn. 74 and 97 below is that of Shackleton, D. R. Bailey's translation of the correspondence: Cicero's Letters to Atticus (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1978)Google Scholar and vol. 1 of Cicero's Letters to His Friends (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1978). The last figure in each citation is to the page in these editions.Google Scholar

73 Off. II, 74.

74 Leg. Agr. I, 23; II, 8. Man. 19. Sest. 98. Fam. 150 (IV.1) 280.

75 Off II, 78–79, 84; III, 70

76 Ibid., II, 83. See Brunt, Peter, “The Roman Mob,” Past and Present 35 (1966), 13; Frier, Landlords and Tenants in Imperial Rome, 163 and n. 239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

77 Off. II, 72. Sest. 103.

78 Off. I, 92; II, 72.

79 Rep. II, 16.

80 Mur. 71.

81 Esp. Off. 11, 78–85.

82 Ibid., 85.

83 Ibid., 78–79. Leg. Agr. I, 23; II, 8, 10, 15, 71, 102–03. Sest. 103.

84 Off. Ill, 21–23.

85 Rep. I, 51, 53; III, 37.

86 Leg. I, 22–33.

87 Ibid., 22.

88 Ibid., 24.

89 Ibid., 22–23. Nat. Dear. II, 148.

90 Leg. I, 22–25, 29, 30, 31.

91 Ibid., 25.

92 Ibid., 30. Slaves are evidently excluded by Cicero.

93 Off. I, 99, 106, 139.

94 Leg. Fragment 2, Loeb Classical Library, 519.

95 Rep. I, 10 Off. I. 115–16. Leg. Agr, II, 3–4, Verr. II v, 180–82. Balbo 18–19. Sulla 23. Sest. 137. Mur. 15–17, and editor's note in Loeb Classical Library.

96 Cicero's ideal of the gentleman is presented in Off. I.

97 For example, Mur. 36. Sex. Rose. 120. Flacc. 18–19. Att. 16 (1.16) 58–59.

98 Off. 1, 150–51; also I, 115–16. Mur. 30.

99 Off. II, 46.