I have to weigh in here. I do not dispute Cicero's many faults. Vain, pompous, long-winded, cowardly, vascillating...yes to all of these. But I can also speak for his place among the heroes of Rome. The aging Augustus is reported to have confiscated a scroll being read by his grandson and, after reading it, declared: "An eloquent man, my child, an eloquent man and a patriot..." Cicero's great misfortune was to have been a man of ideas in a time dominated by men of the sword. It was Caesar, I think, who commented that Cicero had earned greater laurels than any general because it was more important to have extended Rome's genius than the borders of her empire. I contend that in terms of sheer influence through the ages, Cicero probably had a greater impact than any other Roman. His ideas about civic duty balancing the passions of the masses with the elite of the Senate, are ideas that John Adams, James Madison and Benjamin Franklin clearly had in mind when fashioning the U.S. Constitution some 1900 years later. Cicero's ideas on natural law, I would argue, influenced Christian philosophers for centuries to come. It is reported that during her confinement be her enemies the future queen of England, Elizabeth, asked that her monotony be eased with her copy of Cicero.

But I gather this string of commentary is addressed more to the immediate situation in post Republican Rome. He was at this time increasingly old, frail and soft, much too concerned with his own well being to fall on his sword, or to openly quarrel with warlords, like would a Cato. But shouldn't we remember the earlier Cicero who showed physical courage in the Catilinarian crisis? Even though not published, can't we view the Phillipics as an act of political courage against the warlord Antony, whom Cicero realized had none of the wisdom and forbearance of a Caesar? If Caesar was right that it was more important that the genius of Rome be remembered than her empire, I contend Cicero remains in the first rank of "patriots."