Oratio pro Aulo Caecina Cycerona – prawo pomiędzy jurysprudencją a retoryką
Cicero’s Oratio pro Aulo Caecina – The law between jurisprudence and rhetoric

Summary/Abstract: The starting point of the author’s considerations is one of Cicero’s forensic speeches in a civil case, Oratio pro Caecina. But the main purpose of this article is to answer the following question: was Cicero a jurist or not? For many years, this problem was controversial for Romanists, historians and theoreticians of rhetoric. The author puts forward two hypotheses – firstly, a historical one, and secondly a modern one. In the light of the former, Cicero was not a jurist, because in court he played the role of a Roman advocatus and Roman iurisconsultus. From the modern perspective the problem is more complicated – he was a jurist in the modern sense, even if he was not a jurist in today’s meaning. The author’s analysis is constructed more from the point of view of legal philosophy than from the history of Roman law.

• Details
• Contents