Law Before Statute
Can a ruler make a law simply by declaring it? Cicero stakes political obedience on a prior standard: if enacted rules violate reason shared by gods and human beings, they lose the name of law.
Written while Rome struggled to recover from a killing on the Appian Way, the treatise grounds law in reason shared by gods and human beings, not in a sovereign’s command. Cicero therefore treats a statute that contradicts this common order as no law at all, opposing the view that enactment alone creates legality. He then turns principle into clauses for worship, magistrates, and voting. The argument stops before the consul’s powers are settled. Its unfinished form leaves the proposed constitution without a final test.
- nature
- ethics
- truth
- human nature
- logic
- natural law
Enter a dialogue
- When a statute commands what reason forbids, how should a citizen name the obligation?
- Your account makes reason common to gods and humans; what prevents power from calling its preference nature?
- To accept that unjust statutes are not laws, what authority must a person refuse to recognize?
- Where does your natural law differ from a ruler’s claim that enacted commands create legality?