키케로의 반(反)영웅 카틸리나: 『카틸리나 규탄 연설』과 그 이후 (Catiline the Antihero of Cicero: Speeches against Catiline and the Aftermath)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국서양사연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 서양사연구 / 66호 / 1 ~ 27페이지
· 저자명 : 김기훈

초록

This paper examines the historical figure Catiline (L. Sergius Catilina), focusing on the research of the causes that have influenced on evaluating him and his life. For a long time, Catiline has been thought as a byname of the character who was one of the causes for the fall of Roman Republic in the 1st century BCE. According to the historical sources, especially to the Speeches against Catiline (Orationes in L. Catilinam quattuor) of Cicero, Catiline’s conspiracy against the Republic was uncovered and oppressed completely by Cicero the consul himself in the year 63 BCE. Cicero, by the virtue of well- controlling the crises of the state, earned the honorable title, pater patriae.
Afterwards, Catiline was condemned to, figuratively speaking, damnatio memoriae, by Cicero’s authoritative voices in the Speeches. The posterity, following Cicero’s judgment, has reached a similar or rather more severe verdict on Catiline. However, one could reconstruct Catiline as the antihero for Cicero in the history of the later Roman Republic by reading history again. In other words, Cicero the winner took all and Catiline has been always remembered as the loser, but the latter must have had something for extenuation. There are some clues in Sallust’s account on the events. His work, Bellum Catilinae sheds light on the series of events in 60’s BCE including the Catiline’s very conspiracy. But it is the history itself of Roman Republic that Sallust’s historiography mainly focused on, not the personage. So one can interpret Sallust’s works as a diagnosis on the phases of the later Roman Republic. In addition, if both Cicero and Catiline are, as it were. dramatis personae in a scene of Roman history, Catiline is significant antagonist for a protagonist Cicero. Their contrast seems to have provided attractable motives for the spin-off works subsequently. Catiline might have been unduly over- criticized as a heinous traitor, villain or rouge, as the aftermath has showed in the realm of the history, literature, education and arts for ages: e.g. Dante Alighieri’s the monumental epic, La Divina Commedia, the teaching curriculum of Latin language, and the Cesare Macari’s fresco work. Such a tradition has made the portrait of Catiline being permanent as unrecoverably negative one.
It is necessary to study Catiline’s life and his own history, and if possible, there would be something to be modified or revised about him. Perhaps Catiline could never be acquitted for the charge, but he might have some excuses for the his own cause, as this research shows a clue for it. Because the history is also a daughter of time, as the ancient wise said veritas filia temporis.

영어초록

This paper examines the historical figure Catiline (L. Sergius Catilina), focusing on the research of the causes that have influenced on evaluating him and his life. For a long time, Catiline has been thought as a byname of the character who was one of the causes for the fall of Roman Republic in the 1st century BCE. According to the historical sources, especially to the Speeches against Catiline (Orationes in L. Catilinam quattuor) of Cicero, Catiline’s conspiracy against the Republic was uncovered and oppressed completely by Cicero the consul himself in the year 63 BCE. Cicero, by the virtue of well- controlling the crises of the state, earned the honorable title, pater patriae.
Afterwards, Catiline was condemned to, figuratively speaking, damnatio memoriae, by Cicero’s authoritative voices in the Speeches. The posterity, following Cicero’s judgment, has reached a similar or rather more severe verdict on Catiline. However, one could reconstruct Catiline as the antihero for Cicero in the history of the later Roman Republic by reading history again. In other words, Cicero the winner took all and Catiline has been always remembered as the loser, but the latter must have had something for extenuation. There are some clues in Sallust’s account on the events. His work, Bellum Catilinae sheds light on the series of events in 60’s BCE including the Catiline’s very conspiracy. But it is the history itself of Roman Republic that Sallust’s historiography mainly focused on, not the personage. So one can interpret Sallust’s works as a diagnosis on the phases of the later Roman Republic. In addition, if both Cicero and Catiline are, as it were. dramatis personae in a scene of Roman history, Catiline is significant antagonist for a protagonist Cicero. Their contrast seems to have provided attractable motives for the spin-off works subsequently. Catiline might have been unduly over- criticized as a heinous traitor, villain or rouge, as the aftermath has showed in the realm of the history, literature, education and arts for ages: e.g. Dante Alighieri’s the monumental epic, La Divina Commedia, the teaching curriculum of Latin language, and the Cesare Macari’s fresco work. Such a tradition has made the portrait of Catiline being permanent as unrecoverably negative one.
It is necessary to study Catiline’s life and his own history, and if possible, there would be something to be modified or revised about him. Perhaps Catiline could never be acquitted for the charge, but he might have some excuses for the his own cause, as this research shows a clue for it. Because the history is also a daughter of time, as the ancient wise said veritas filia temporis.

참고자료

· 없음