1/2.

I'm going to split my response in two because I think it may go over the word count and because I am sure I will need to go to work before I manage to get the second part down. This first part takes a closer look at the episode in question (it comes from one of Cicero's published speeches) and examines how well your source got the gist (spoiler alert: we'll walk your source's claims back a bit), but qualifying the claims won't really give us an answer to the bigger question about the position of actors and actresses in Roman society (spoiler alert: yes, in Roman eyes it would have mattered that the alleged victim was an actress rather than a respectable woman), so we'll address that later in Part 2.

So, Cicero! We need to take this specific accusation in context, because its context is very particular. The episode of the actress comes from Pro Plancio, the published version of a speech given by Cicero in defense of one Plancius on charges of, not rape, but electoral corruption. Remember that. This isn't a record pertaining to a rape trial at all, it basically just provides a secondary front on which prosecution can argue that Plancius is the kind of immoral fellow who wouldn't be above committing the crime they're actually trying him for. Throwing this kind of shade was a stock tactic in Roman courts (which doesn't necessarily mean any given accusation wasn't true, of course).

Cicero's job for the defense was to deflect this kind of character attack, and his defense is the only reason we know about the accusation. But being as we have it from the defense perspective, we should really expect the presentation to be all sorts of biased.

The Latin of the passage in question reads thus, followed by the English translation available on Perseus:

raptam esse mimulam, quod dicitur Atinae factum a iuventute vetere quodam in scaenicos iure maximeque oppidano. O adulescentiam traductam eleganter, cui quidem cum quod licuerit obiciatur, tamen id ipsum falsum reperiatur!

You say that an actress was ravished by him. And this is said to have happened at Atina, while he was quite young, by a sort of established licence of proceeding towards theatrical people, well known in all towns. O how elegantly must his youth have been passed, when the only thing which is imputed to him is one that there was not much harm in, and when even that is found to be false.

Let's look at mimula(m), translated here as actress. Mimula is the diminutive form of mima, so literally it means little actress, and taking the diminutive form literally is probably how your source arrived at twelve years old. As in English, however, Latin diminutives are often used to be dismissive or insulting rather than in a strictly literal sense, and that's the case here. It's Cicero being dismissive, implying that the little actress and whatever may or may not have happened to her are beneath our notice, not telling us that she's physically small because she's a child.

So, our first few walk-backs: the actress wasn't said to be twelve, or a child, the court case wasn't directly about her rape at all, and what we actually have a record of is the defense proposing that the accusation be laughed out of court.

Next, let's pay close attention to what Cicero is doing here: to the context in which he brings this accusation against his client up and to the way he frames his dismissal of it.

• Cicero puts the rape accusation and the statement that this behavior was normal in small-town society (oppidano connotes small towns, a bit backwatery perhaps) into the mouths of his opponents.
• Cicero then takes the prosecutor's hat back off to retort that his client is so squeaky-clean that the prosecution had to stretch for this minor story from years ago, and by the way, the story isn't even true.

So the claim that this behavior was normal in small-town societies - I think it's interesting that Cicero puts those words in his opponents mouths. He clearly wants the jury to conclude that there's nothing much to this accusation - he throws up a one-off blanket first line of offense, that this rape just didn't happen at all, but he really focuses on this fallback position, that anyway it would have been no big deal. A dismissive diminutive for the actress and a normalization of the offense, both words put in the prosecutor's mouth, then he switches to his own defender's voice to agree that yes, there just wouldn't have been much harm done. The triple effort should probably lead us to conclude that the fallback defense is also the most important defense.

Obviously, by suggesting this line of defense at all, Cicero is appealing to the type of listener who might be willing to agree that yes, young men going out and raping actresses is nothing to bother about.

(Topping the list of quotes I never want taken out of context...)

That he puts that in the opponent's mouth also suggests to me that he's hedging his bets, maybe trying to avoid going a bridge too far for an audience of respectable jurors and citizens. That at least a few of his audience might be offended on behalf of the culture of small Roman towns, or might be inclined to agree that even if there isn't anything all that wrong with going out and raping an actress, it's still not a sign of gleaming moral character and might indeed suggest that the accused is the kind of man who wouldn't feel any qualms about bribery.

By using his opponent's voice, Cicero can play to both sides of that possible opinion divide - anyone inclined to agree with the argument gets prompted to do so, anyone who might be a bit offended at ascribing huge rape culture to small-town Rome can be offended at the prosecution.

We don't have the prosecution's speech, but even though this accusation is basically a sideshow to the case, I think it's a safe bet they wouldn't have chosen to frame it in the dismissive way Cicero does and would likely have presented it as a more serious offense. Cicero put that framing in their mouths because he wanted to say it without being responsible for saying it.

So, that's our ringing defense of the wonderful job late Republican Rome did at protecting lowly women. We have some reading-between-the-lines guess that some jurors might have been a bit offended at ascribing totally open rape culture to their fellow citizens. The prosecutors almost certainly didn't raise the matter in the totally dismissive tone Cicero uses, but today we only have his words. Rape of an actress was, if not something the law really needed to address in its own right, at least a bit of a blemish on one's character in some people's eyes, or else the prosecutors wouldn't have brought it into a case about bribery at all.

Impressed?

Me neither. Upcoming, Part 2, where we zoom out from this particular speech and take a look at the social position of Roman actors and actresses as it relates to prostitutes, gladiators, and - inevitably - slaves.

Stay tuned.