All these changes had been proposed or accepted by Pompey rather to

please the multitude than to obey distinct convictions. And by them he

lost his true supporters in the upper classes, without gaining, in the

opposite party, the foremost place, already occupied by Cæsar. But

Pompey, blind to real worth, imagined then that no one could surpass him

in influence; always favoured by circumstances, he had been accustomed

to see both the arrogance of Sylla and the majesty of the laws yield

before him. Notwithstanding a first refusal by the Dictator, at

twenty-six years of age he had obtained the honours of the triumph,

without having fulfilled any of the legal conditions. Contrary to the

laws, a second triumph had been accorded him, as also the consulship,

though out of Rome, and without having followed the necessary order of

hierarchy of the magistracies. Full of presumption through the examples

of the past, full of confidence in the future through the adulation of

the present, he thought he might wound the interests of the nobles

without alienating them, and flatter the tastes and passions of the

people without losing his dignity. Towards the end of his consulship,

he, the chief magistrate of the Republic, he, who thought himself above

all others, presented himself as a mere soldier at the annual review of

the knights. The momentary effect was immense when the censors, seated

on their tribunal, saw Pompey traversing the crowd, preceded by all the

pomp of the consular power, and leading before them his horse, which he

held by the bridle. The crowd, silent till then, burst out into

transports of joy, overcome with admiration at the sight of so great a

man glorifying himself for being a simple knight, and modestly

submitting himself to the legal forms. But on the demand of the censors

if he had made all the campaigns required by law, he answered, “Yes, I

have made them all, never having had any other general than

myself.”[859] The ostentation of this reply shows that this step of

Pompey’s was a false modesty, the most insupportable form of pride,

according to the expression of Marcus Aurelius.

[Sidenote: Cæsar Questor (686).]

III. Neither did Cæsar disdain ceremonial; but he sought to give it a

significance which should make an impression upon the mind. The

opportunity soon presented itself. Soon after he was nominated questor

and admitted to the Senate, he lost his aunt Julia and his wife

Cornelia, and hastened to make a veritable political manifestation of

their funeral oration.[860] It was the custom at Rome to pronounce a

eulogy on women only when they died at an advanced age. Cæsar obtained

public approbation by departing from this usage in favour of his young

wife; they saw in it, according to Plutarch,[861] a proof of sensibility

and softness of manners; but they applauded not the family sentiment

only, they glorified much more the inspiration of the politician who

dared to make a panegyric on the husband of Julia, the celebrated

Marius, whose image, in wax, carried by Cæsar’s orders in the funeral

procession, re-appeared for the first time since the proscription of

Sylla.[862]

After having rendered these last honors to his wife, he accompanied, in

the capacity of questor, the prætor Antistius Vetus, sent into Ulterior

Spain.[863] The peninsula was then divided into two great provinces:

Citerior Spain, since called Tarraconensis, and Ulterior Spain,

comprising Bætica and Lusitania.[864] The positive limits, we may well

believe, were not very exactly determined, but at this epoch the _Saltus

Castulonensis_, which corresponds with the Sierras Nevada and

Cazorla,[865] was considered as such between these two provinces. To the

north, the limitation could not be made any more distinct, the Asturias

not being thoroughly conquered. The capital of Ulterior Spain was

Corduba (_Cordova_), where the prætor resided.[866]

The chief towns, doubtless connected by military roads, formed so many

centres of general meeting, where assizes for the regulation of business

were held. These meetings were called _conventus civium Romanorum_,[867]

because the members who composed them were Roman citizens dwelling in

the country. The prætor, or his delegate, presided over them once a

year.[868] Each province in Spain had several of them. In the first

century of our era, there were three for Lusitania and four for

Bætica.[869]

Cæsar, the delegate of the prætor, visited these towns, presiding over

the assemblies and administering justice. He was noted for his spirit of

conciliation and equity,[870] and showed a lively solicitude for the

interests of the Spaniards.[871] As the character of illustrious men is

revealed in their smallest actions, it is not a matter of indifference

to mention the gratitude which Cæsar always had for the good offices of

Vetus. Plutarch informs us that a strict union reigned between them ever

after, and Cæsar took care to name the son of Vetus questor when he

himself was raised to the prætorship,[872] as sensible of friendship as

he was later forgetful of injuries.

Yet the love of glory and the consciousness of his high faculties made

him aspire to a more important part. He manifested his impatient desire

for this one day when he went to visit the famous temple of Hercules at

Gades, as Hannibal and Scipio had done before.[873] At the sight of the

statue of Alexander, he deplored with a sigh that he had done nothing at

the age when this great man had conquered the whole world.[874] In fact,

Cæsar was then thirty-two years old, nearly the age at which Alexander

died. Having obtained his recall to Rome, he stopped on his return in

Gallia Transpadana (687).[875] The colonies founded in this country

possessed the Latin law (_jus Latii_), which Pompeius Strabo had granted

them, but they vainly demanded the rights of Roman city. The presence of

Cæsar, already known for his friendly feelings towards the provinces,

excited a lively emotion among the inhabitants, who saw in him the

representative of their interests and their cause. The enthusiasm was

such, that the Senate, terrified, thought itself obliged to retain for

some time longer in Italy the legions destined for the army in

Asia.[876]

The ascendency of Pompey still continued, though, since his consulship,

he had remained without command, having undertaken, in 684, not to

accept the government of any province at the expiration of his

magistracy;[877] but his popularity began to disquiet the Senate, so

much is it in the very essence of the aristocracy to distrust those who

raise themselves, and extend their powers beyond itself. This was an

additional motive for Cæsar to connect himself more closely with Pompey;

whereupon he backed him with all his influence; and either to cement

this alliance, or because of his inclination for a beautiful and

graceful woman, shortly after his return he married Pompeia, the

kinswoman of Pompey, and granddaughter of Sylla.[878] He was thus, at

one and the same time, the arbiter of elegance, the hope of the

democratic party, and the only public man whose opinions and conduct had

never varied.

[Sidenote: The Gabinian Law (687).]

IV. The decadence of a political body is evident when the measures most

useful to the glory of a country, instead of arising from its provident

initiative, are inaugurated by obscure and often disreputable men, the

faithful but dishonoured organs of public opinion. Thus the propositions

made at this epoch, far from being inspired by the Senate, were put

forward by uninfluential individuals, and carried by the violent

attitude of the people. The first referred to the pirates, who, upheld

and encouraged by Mithridates, had long infested the seas, and ravaged

all the coasts; an energetic repression was indispensable. These bold

adventurers, whose number the civil wars had greatly increased, had

become a veritable power. Setting out from Cilicia, their common centre,

they armed whole fleets, and found a refuge in important towns.[879]

They had pillaged the much-frequented port of Caieta (_Gaëta_), dared to

land at Ostia, and carry off the inhabitants to slavery; sunk in mid

seas a Roman fleet under the orders of a consul, and made two prætors

prisoners.[880] Not only strangers deputed to Rome, but the ambassadors

of the Republic, had fallen into their hands, and had undergone the

shame of being ransomed.[881] Finally, the pirates intercepted the

imports of wheat indispensable for the feeding of the city. To remedy so

humiliating a state of things, the tribune of the people, Aulus

Gabinius, proposed to confide the war against the pirates to one sole

general; to give him, for three years, extended powers, large forces,

and to place three lieutenants under his orders.[882] The assembly of

the people instantly accepted this proposition, notwithstanding the

small esteem in which the character of its author was held; and the name

of Pompey was in every mouth; but “the senators,” says Dio Cassius,

“would have preferred to suffer the greatest evils from the pirates,

than to have invested Pompey with such a power;”[883] they were ready to

put to death, in the curia itself, the tribune who was the author of the

motion. Scarcely had the multitude heard of the opposition of the

senators, when they flocked in crowds, invaded the place of meeting, and

would have massacred them, had they not been protected from their

fury.[884]

The projected law, submitted to the suffrages of the people, attacked by

Catulus and Q. Hortensius, energetically supported by Cæsar, is then

adopted; and they confer on Pompey, for three years, the proconsular

authority over all the seas, over all the coasts, and for fifty miles

into the interior; they grant him 6,000 talents (35 millions

[£1,400,000]),[885] twenty-five lieutenants, and the power of taking

such vessels and troops as he should judge necessary. The allies,

foreigners, and the provinces, were called on to concur in this

expedition. They equipped five hundred ships, they levied a hundred and

twenty thousand infantry and five thousand horse. The Senate, in spite

of itself, sanctioned the clauses of this law, the utility of which was

so manifest that its publication alone was sufficient to lower the price

of wheat all through Italy.[886]

Pompey adopted an able plan for putting an end to piracy. He divided the

Mediterranean coasts from the Columns of Hercules to the Hellespont and

the southern shores of the Black Sea into ten separate commands;[887] at

the head of each he placed one of his lieutenants. He himself,

retaining the general surveillance, went to Cilicia with the rest of his

forces. This vast plan protected all the shores, left the pirates no

refuge, and enabled him to destroy their fleet and attack them in their

dens at once. In three months Pompey re-established the safety of the

seas, took a thousand castles or strongholds, destroyed three hundred

towns, took eight hundred ships, and made twenty thousand prisoners,

whom he transferred into the interior of Asia, where he employed them in

building a city, which received the name of Pompeiopolis.[888]

[Sidenote: The Manilian Law (688).]

V. At these tidings, the enthusiasm for Pompey, then in the island of

Crete, redoubled, and they talked of placing in his hands the fate of

another war. Although Lucullus had obtained brilliant successes over

Mithridates and Tigranes, his military position in Asia began to be

compromised. He had experienced reverses; insubordination reigned among

his soldiers; his severity excited their complaints; and the news of the

arrival of the two proconsuls from Cilicia, Acilius Glabrio and Marcius

Rex, sent to command a part of the provinces until then under his

orders, had weakened respect for his authority.[889] These circumstances

determined Manlius, tribune of the people, to propose that the

government of the provinces trusted to Lucullus should be given to

Pompey, joining to them Bithynia, and preserving to him the power which

he already exercised over all the seas. “It was,” says Plutarch, “to

submit the whole Roman empire to one sole man, and to deprive Lucullus

of the fruits of his victories.”[890] Never, indeed, had such power been

confided to any citizen, neither to the first Scipio to ruin Carthage,

nor to the second to destroy Numantia. The people grew more and more

accustomed to regard this concentration of power in one hand as the only

means of salvation. The Senate, taxing these proposals with ingratitude,

combated them with all its strength; Hortensius asserted that if all the

authority was to be trusted to one man, no person was more worthy of it

than Pompey, but that so much authority ought not to be centred in one

person.[891] Catulus cried that they had done with liberty, and that,

henceforth to enjoy this, they would be forced to retire to the woods

and mountains.[892] Cicero, on the contrary, inaugurated his entrance

into the Senate by a magnificent oration, which has been preserved to

us; he showed that it was for the best interest of the Republic to give

the conduct of this war to a captain whose noble deeds in the past, and

whose moderation and integrity, vouched for the future. “So many other

generals,” he said at the close, “proceed on an expedition only with the

hope of enriching themselves. Can those who think we ought not to grant

all these powers to one man alone ignore this, and do we not see that

what renders Pompey so great is not only his own virtues, but the vices

of others?”[893] As to Cæsar, he seconded, with all his power, the

efforts of Cicero[894] for the adoption of the law, which, supported by

public feeling, and submitted to the suffrage of the tribes, was adopted

unanimously.

Certainly, Lucullus had deserved well of his country, and it was cruel

to deprive him of the glory of terminating a war which he had

prosperously begun;[895] but the definitive success of the campaign

demanded his substitution, and the instinct of the people did not

deceive them. Often, in difficult cases, they see more clearly than an

assembly preoccupied with the interests of castes or of persons, and

events soon show that they are right.

Lucullus had announced at Rome the end of the war; yet Mithridates was

far from being conquered. This fierce enemy of the Romans, who had

continued the struggle twenty-four years, and whom evil fortune had

never been able to discourage, would not treat, despite his sixty four

years and recent reverses, save on conditions inadmissible by the

Romans. The fame of Pompey then was not useless against such an

adversary. His ascendency alone could bring back discipline into the

army and intimidate the enemy. In fact, his presence was sufficient to

re-establish order, and retain under their standards the old soldiers

who had obtained their discharge, and wished to return to their

homes;[896] they formed the flower of the army, and were known under the

name of _Valerians_.[897] On the other hand, Tigranes, having learned

the arrival of Pompey, abandoned the party of his father-in-law,

declaring that this general was the only one to whom he would

submit,[898] so much does the prestige of one man, says Dio Cassius,

lord it over that of another.[899]

Manilius then demanded the re-establishment of the law of Caius

Gracchus, by virtue of which the _centuria prærogativa_, instead of

being drawn by lot from the first classes of the tribes, was taken

indiscriminately from all the classes, which destroyed the distinctions

of rank and fortune in the elections, and deprived the richer of their

electoral privileges.[900]

We see that it was generally the tribunes of the people who, obeying the

inspiration of greater men, took the initiative in the more popular

measures. But the major part, without disinterestedness or moderation,

often compromised those who had recourse to their services by their

unruly ardour and subversive opinions. Manilius, in 688, suddenly

re-opened a question which always created great agitation at Rome; this

was the political emancipation of the freedmen. He obtained, by a

surprise, the readoption of the law Sulpicia, which gave a vote to the

freedmen by distributing them among the thirty-five tribes, and asserted

that he had the consent of Crassus and Pompey. But the Senate revoked

the law some time after its adoption, agreeing in this with the chiefs

of the popular party, who did not think it was demanded by public

opinion.[901]

[Sidenote: Cæsar Curule Ædile (689).]

VI. Whilst all the favours of fortune seemed to have accumulated on the

idol of the moment, Cæsar, remaining at Rome, was chosen inspector

(_curator_) of the Appian Way (687).[902] The maintenance of the

highways brought much popularity to those who undertook the charge with

disinterestedness; Cæsar gained all the more by his, as he contributed

largely to the cost, and even compromised his own fortune thereby.

Two years afterwards (689), nominated curule ædile with Bibulus, he

displayed a magnificence which excited the acclamations of the crowd,

always greedy of sights. The place named _Comitium_, the Forum, the

Basilicæ, the Capitol itself, were magnificently decorated. Temporary

porticoes were erected, under which were exposed a crowd of precious

objects.[903] These expenses were not unusual: since the triumph of the

dictator Papirius Cursor, all the æediles were accustomed to contribute

to the embellishment of the Forum.[904] Cæsar celebrated with great pomp

the Roman games, and the feast of Cybele, and gave the finest shows of

wild beasts and gladiators ever yet beheld.[905] The number of the

combatants amounted to three hundred and twenty couples, according to

Plutarch, a contemptuous expression, which proves the small account made

of the lives of these men. Cicero, writing to Atticus, speaks of them as

we in our day should speak of racehorses;[906] and the grave Atticus

himself had gladiators, as had most of the great people of his time.

These bloody games, which seem so inhuman to us, still preserved the

religious character which at first they so exclusively possessed; they

were celebrated in honour of the dead;[907] Cæsar gave them as a

sacrifice to his father’s memory, and displayed in them an unwonted

pomp.[908] The number of gladiators which he got together terrified the

Senate, and for the future it was forbidden to exceed a given number.

Bibulus, his colleague, it is true, bore half the expense; nevertheless,

the public gave Cæsar all the credit of this sumptuous discharge of the

duties of their office. Thus Bibulus said that he was like the temple of

Castor and Pollux, which, dedicated to the two brothers, was never

called anything but the temple of Castor.[909]

The nobles saw in the sumptuousness of these games only a vain

ostentation, a frivolous desire to shine; they congratulated themselves

on the prodigality of the ædile, and predicted in his near ruin a term

to his influence; but Cæsar, while spending millions to amuse the

multitude, did not make this fleeting enthusiasm the sole basis of his

popularity; he established this on more solid grounds, by re-awakening

in the people the memories of glory and liberty.

Not content with having helped in several healing measures, with having

gained over Pompey to his opinions, and sought for the first time to

revive the memory of Marius, he wished to sound public opinion by an

astounding manifestation. At the moment when the splendour of his

ædileship had produced the most favourable impression on the crowd, he

secretly restored the trophies of Marius, formerly overturned by Sylla,

and ordered them to be placed in the Capitol[910] during the night. The

next day, when they saw these images shining with gold, chiselled with

infinite art, and adorned with inscriptions which recalled the victories

gained over Jugurtha, the Cimbri, and the Teutones, the nobles began to

murmur, blaming Cæsar for having dared to revive seditious emblems and

proscribed remembrances; but the partisans of Marius flocked in large

numbers to the Capitol, making its sacred roof resound with their

acclamations. Many shed tears on seeing the venerated features of their

old general, and proclaimed Cæsar the worthy successor of that great

captain.[911]

Uneasy at these demonstrations, the Senate assembled, and Lutatius

Catulus, whose father had been one of the victims of Marius, accused

Cæsar of wishing to overthrow the Republic, “no longer secretly, by

undermining it, but openly, in attacking it by breach.”[912] Cæsar

repelled this attack, and his partisans, delighted at his success, vied

with each other in saying “that he would carry it over all his rivals,

and with the help of the people would take the first rank in the

Republic.”[913] Henceforth the popular party had a head.

The term of his ædileship having expired, Cæsar solicited the mission of

transforming Egypt into a Roman province.[914] The matter in hand was

the execution of the will of King Ptolemy Alexas, or Alexander,[915]

who, following the example of other kings, had left his state to the

Roman peoples. But the will was revoked as doubtful,[916] and it seems

that the Senate shrank from taking possession of so rich a country,

fearing, as did Augustus later, to make the proconsul who should govern

it too powerful.[917] The mission of reducing Egypt to a Roman province

was brilliant and fruitful. It would have given to those who might be

charged with it extensive military power, and the disposal of large

resources. Crassus also placed himself on the list, but after long

debates the Senate put an end to all rival pretensions.[918]

About the same time when Crassus was endeavouring to get the inhabitants

of Gallia Transpadana admitted to the rights of Roman citizens, the

tribune of the people, Caius Papius, caused to be adopted a law for the

expulsion of all foreigners from Rome.[919] For, in their pride, the

Romans thus called those who were not Latins by origin.[920] This

measure would specially affect the Transpadanes, who were devoted to

Cæsar, because he had formerly promised to procure for them the title of

citizen, which had been refused. It was feared that they would get into

the comitia, for, since the emancipation of the Italiotes, it was

difficult to distinguish among those who had the right of voting, since

often even slaves fraudulently participated in the elections.[921]

[Sidenote: Cæsar _judex quæstionis_ (660).]

VIII. Cæsar soon re-commenced the political struggle against the still

living instruments of past oppression, in which he had engaged at the

beginning of his career. He neglected no opportunity of calling down

upon them the rigours of justice or the opprobrium of public opinion.

The long duration of the civil troubles had given birth to a class of

malefactors called _sicarii_,[922] who committed all sorts of murders

and robberies. In 674 Sylla had promulgated a severe edict against them,

which, however, excepted the executors of his vengeance in the pay of

the treasury.[923] These last were exposed to public animadversion; and

though Cato had obtained the restitution of the sums allotted as the

price of the heads of the proscribed,[924] no one had yet dared to bring

them to justice.[925] Cæsar, notwithstanding the law of Sylla, undertook

their prosecution.

Under his presidency, in his capacity as _judex quæstionis_, L. Luscius,

who, by the dictator’s order, had slain three of the proscribed, and L.

Bellienus, uncle of Catiline and murderer of Lucretius Ofella, were

prosecuted and condemned.[926] Catiline, accused, at the instigation of

L. Lucceius, orator and historian, the friend of Cæsar, of having slain

the celebrated M. Marius Gratidianus, was acquitted.[927]

[Sidenote: Conspiracies against the Senate (690).]

VIII. Whilst Cæsar endeavoured to react legally against the system of

Sylla, another party, composed of the ambitious and discontented, ruined

by debt, had long sought to arrive at power by plotting. Of this number

had been, since 688, Cn. Piso, P. Sylla, P. Autronius, and Catiline.

These men, with diverse antecedents and different qualities, were

equally decried, yet they did not want for adherents among the lower

class, whose passions they flattered, or among the upper class, to whose

policy or enmity they were serviceable. P. Sylla and Autronius, after

having been made consuls-elect in 688, had been effaced from the

senatorial list for solicitation. Public report mixed up the names of

Crassus and Cæsar with these secret manœuvres; but was it possible that

these two men, in such opposite positions, and even divided between

themselves, should enter into an understanding together for the sake of

a vulgar plot; and was it not a new inconsistency of calumny to

associate in the same conspiracy Cæsar because of his immense debts, and

Crassus because of his immense riches?

Let us remark, besides, that each of the factions then in agitation

necessarily sought to compromise, for the purpose of appropriating to

itself, such a personage as Cæsar, notorious for his name, his

generosity, and his courage.

A matter which has remained obscure, but which then made a great noise,

shows the progress of the ideas of disorder. One of the conspirators,

Cn. Piso, had taken part in the attempt to assassinate the Consuls Cotta

and Torquatus; yet he obtained, through the influence of Crassus, the

post of questor _pro prætore_ into Citerior Spain; the Senate, either to

get rid of him, or in the doubtful hope of finding in him some support

against Pompey, whose power began to appear formidable, consented to

grant him this province. But in 691, on his arrival in Spain, he was

slain by his escort--some say by the secret emissaries of Pompey.[928]

As to Catiline, he was not the man to bend under the weight of the

misfortunes of his friends, or under his own losses; he employed new

ardour in braving the perils of a conspiracy, and in pursuing the

honours of the consulship. He was the most dangerous adversary the

Senate had. Cæsar supported this candidature. In a spirit of opposition,

he supported all that could hurt his enemies and favour a change of

system. Besides, all parties were constrained to deal with those who

enjoyed the popular favour. The nobles accepted as candidate C. Antonius

Hybrida, a worthless man, capable only of selling himself and of

treachery.[929] Cicero, in 690, had promised Catiline to defend

him;[930] and a year before, the Consul Torquatus, one of the most

esteemed chiefs of the Senate, pleaded for the same individual accused

of embezzlement.[931]

[Sidenote: the difficulty of constituting a New Party.]

IX. We thus see that the misfortunes of the times obliged the most

notable men to have dealings with those whose antecedents seemed to

devote them to contempt.

In times of transition, when a choice must be made between a glorious

past and an unknown future, the rock is, that bold and unscrupulous men

alone thrust themselves forward; others, more timid, and the slaves of

prejudices, remain in the shade, or offer some obstacle to the movement

which hurries away society into new ways. It is always a great evil for

a country, a prey to agitations, when the party of the honest, or that

of the good, as Cicero calls them, do not embrace the new ideas, to

direct by moderating them. Hence profound divisions. On the one side,

unknown men often take possession of the good or bad passions of the

crowd; on the other, honourable men, immovable or morose, oppose all

progress, and by their obstinate resistance excite legitimate impatience

and lamentable violence. The opposition of these last has the double

inconvenience of leaving the way clear to those who are less worthy than

themselves, and of throwing doubts into the minds of that floating mass,

which judges parties much more by the honourableness of men than by the

value of ideas.

What was then passing in Rome offers a striking example of this. Was it

not reasonable, in fact, that men should hesitate to prefer a faction

which had at its head such illustrious names as Hortensius, Catulus,

Marcellus, Lucullus, and Cato, to that which had for its main-stays

individuals like Gabinius, Manilius, Catiline, Vatinius, and Clodius?

What more legitimate in the eyes of the descendants of the ancient

families than this resistance to all change, and this disposition to

consider all reform as Utopian and almost as sacrilege? What more

logical for them than to admire Cato’s firmness of soul, who, still

young, allowed himself to be menaced with death rather than admit the

possibility of becoming one day the defender of the cause of the allies

claiming the rights of Roman citizens?[932] How not comprehend the

sentiments of Catulus and Hortensius obstinately defending the

privileges of the aristocracy, and manifesting their fears at this

general inclination to concentrate all power in the hands of one

individual?

And yet the cause maintained by these men was condemned to perish, as

everything which has had its time. Notwithstanding their virtues, they

were only an additional obstacle to the steady march of civilisation,

because they wanted the qualities most essential for a time of

revolution--an appreciation of the wants of the moment, and of the

problems of the future. Instead of trying what they could save from the

shipwreck of the ancient regime, just breaking to pieces against a

fearful rock, the corruption of political morals, they refuse to admit

that the institutions to which the Republic owed its grandeur could

bring about its decay. Terrified at all innovation, they confounded in

the same anathema the seditious enterprises of certain tribunes, and the

just reclamations of the citizens. But their influence was so

considerable, and ideas consecrated by time have so much empire over

minds, that they would have yet hindered the triumph of the popular

cause, if Cæsar, in putting himself at its head, had not given it a new

glory and an irresistible force. A party, like an army, can only conquer

with a chief worthy to command it; and all those who, since the Gracchi,

had unfurled the standard of reform, had sullied it with blood, and

compromised it by revolts. Cæsar raised and purified it. To constitute

his party, it is true, he had recourse to agents but little estimated;

the best architect can build only with the materials under his hand; but

his constant endeavour was to associate to himself the most trustworthy

men, and he spared no effort to gain by turns Pompey, Crassus, Cicero,

Servilius Cæpio, Q. Fufius Calenus, Serv. Sulpicius, and many others.

In moments of transition, when the old system is at an end, and the new

not yet established, the greatest difficulty consists, not in overcoming

the obstacles which are in the way of the advent of a regime demanded by

the country, but to establish the latter solidly, by establishing it

upon the concurrence of honourable men penetrated with the new ideas,

and steady in their principles.

CHAPTER III.

(691-695.)

[Sidenote: Cicero and Antonius, Consuls (691).]

I. In the year 690, the candidates for the consulship were Cicero, C.

Antonius Hybrida, L. Cassius Longinus, Q. Cornificius, C. Lucinius

Sacerdos, P. Sulpicius Galba, and Catiline.[933] Informed of the plots

so long in progress, the Senate determined to combat the conspiracies of

the last by throwing all the votes they could dispose of upon Cicero,

who was thus unanimously elected, and took possession of his office at

the beginning of 691. This choice made up for the mediocrity of his

colleague Antonius.

The illustrious orator, whose eloquence had such authority, was born at

Arpinum, of obscure parents; he had served some time in the war of the

allies;[934] afterwards, his orations acquired for him a great

reputation, amongst others the defence of the young Roscius, whom the

dictator would have despoiled of his paternal heritage. After the death

of Sylla, he was appointed questor and sent to Sicily. In 684, he lashed

with his implacable speech the atrocities of Verres; at last, in 688, he

obtained the prætorship, and displayed in this capacity those sentiments

of high probity and of justice which distinguished him throughout his

whole career. But the esteem of his fellow-citizens would not have

sufficed, in ordinary times, to have raised him to the first magistracy.

“The dread of the conspiracy,” says Sallust, “was the cause of his

elevation. Under other circumstances, the pride of the nobility would

have revolted against such a choice. The consulship would have been

considered profaned, if, even with superior merit, a new man[935] had

obtained it; but, on the approach of danger, envy and pride became

silent.”[936] The Roman aristocracy must have greatly lost its

influence, when, at a critical moment, it allowed a new man to possess

more authority over the people than one from its own ranks.

By birth, as well as by his instincts, Cicero belonged to the popular

party; nevertheless, the irresolution of his mind, sensible to flattery,

and his fear of innovations, led him to serve by turn the rancours of

the great or those of the people.[937] Of upright heart, but

pusillanimous, he only saw rightly when his self-esteem was not at stake

or his interest in danger. Elected consul, he ranged himself on the side

of the Senate, and resisted all proposals advantageous to the multitude.

Cæsar honoured his talent, but had little confidence in his character;

hence he was averse to his candidature, and hostile during the whole of

his consulship.

[Sidenote: Agrarian Law of Rullus.]

II. Scarcely had Cicero entered on his functions, when the tribune P.

Servilius Rullus revived one of those projects which, for ages, have had

the effect of exciting to the highest degree both the avidity of the

proletaries and the anger of the Senate: it was an agrarian law.

It contained the following provisions: To sell, with certain

exceptions,[938] the territories recently conquered, and some other

domains but little productive to the State; devoting the proceeds to the

purchase, by private contract, of lands in Italy which were to be

divided among the indigent citizens; to cause to be nominated, according

to the customary mode for the election of grand pontiff--that is, by

seventeen tribes, drawn by lot from the thirty-five--ten commissioners

or decemvirs, to whom should be left, for five years, the power,

absolute and without control, of distributing or alienating the domains

of the Republic and private properties wherever they liked. No one could

be appointed who was not present in Rome, which excluded Pompey, and the

authority of the decemvirs was to be sanctioned by a curiate law. To

them alone was intrusted the right to decide what belonged to the State

and what to individuals. The lands of the public domain which should not

be alienated were to be charged with a considerable impost.[939] The

decemvirs had also the power of compelling all the generals, Pompey

excepted, to account for the booty and money received during war, but

not yet deposited in the treasury, or employed upon some monument. They

were allowed to found colonies anywhere they thought proper,

particularly in the territory of Stella, and in the _ager_ of Campania,

where five thousand Roman citizens were to be established. In a word,

the administration of the revenues and the resources of the State came

almost wholly into their hands; they had, moreover, their lictors; they

could take the omens, and choose amongst the knights two hundred persons

to execute their decrees in the provinces, and these were without

appeal.

This project offered inconveniences, but also great advantages. Rullus,

certainly, was to blame for not designating all the places where he

wished to establish colonies; for making two exemptions, one favourable,

the other unfavourable to Pompey; for assigning to the decemvirs powers

too extensive, tending to arbitrary acts and speculations: nevertheless,

his project had an important political aim. The public domain,

encroached upon by usurpations or by the colonies of Sylla, had almost

disappeared. The law was to re-constitute it by the sale of conquered

territories. On the other side, the lands confiscated in great number by

Sylla, and given or sold at a paltry price to his partisans, had

suffered a general depreciation, for the ownership was liable to be

contested, and they no longer found purchasers. The Republic, while

desirous of relieving the poorer class, had thus an interest in raising

the price of these lands and in securing the holders. The project of

Rullus was, in fact, a veritable law of indemnity. There are injustices

which, sanctioned by time, ought also to be sanctioned by law, in order

to extinguish the causes of dissension, by restoring their security to

existing things, and its value to property.

If the great orator had known how to raise himself above the questions

of person and of party, he would, like Cæsar, have supported the

proposal of the tribune, amending only what was too absolute or too

vague in it; but, overreached by the faction of the great, and desiring

to please the knights, whose interests the law injured, he attacked it

with his usual eloquence, exaggerating its defects. It would only

benefit, he said, a small number of persons. Whilst appearing to favour

Pompey, it deprived him, on account of his absence, of the chance of

being chosen decemvir. It allowed some individuals to dispose of

kingdoms like Egypt, and of the immense territories of Asia. Capua would

become the capital of Italy, and Rome, surrounded by a girdle of

military colonies devoted to ten new tyrants, would lose its

independence. To purchase the lands, instead of apportioning the _ager

publicus_, was monstrous, and he could not admit that they would engage

the people to abandon the capital to go and languish in the fields.

Then, exposing the double personal interest of the author of the law, he

reminded them that the father-in-law of Rullus was enriched with the

spoils of proscripts, and that Rullus himself had reserved the right of

being nominated decemvir.

Cicero, nevertheless, pointed out clearly the political bearing of the

project, although censuring it, when he said; “The new law enriches

those who occupied the domain lands, and withdraws them from public

indignation. How many men are embarrassed by their vast possessions, and

cannot support the odium attached to the largesses of Sylla! How many

would sell them, and find no buyers! How many seek means, of whatever

kind, to dispossess themselves of them!... And you, Romans, you are

going to sell those revenues which your ancestors have acquired at the

cost of so much sweat and blood, to augment the fortune and assure the

tranquillity of the possessors of the goods confiscated by Sylla!”[940]

We see thus that Cicero seems to deny the necessity of allaying the

inquietudes of the new and numerous acquirers of this kind of national

property; and yet, when a short time afterwards another tribune proposed

to relieve from civic degradation the sons of proscripts, he opposed

him, not because this reparation appeared to him unjust, but for fear

the rehabilitation in political rights should carry with it the

reintegration into the properties, a measure, according to his views,

subversive of all interests.[941] Thus, with a strange inconsistency,

Cicero combated these two laws of conciliation; the one because it

re-assured, the other because it disquieted the holders of the effects

of the proscribed. Why must it be that, amongst men of superiority, but

without convictions, talent only too often serves to sustain with the

like facility the most opposite causes? The opinion of Cicero triumphed,

nevertheless, thanks to his eloquence; and the project, despite the

lively adhesion of the people, encountered in the Senate such a

resistance, that it was abandoned without being referred to the comitia.

Cæsar advocated the agrarian law, because it raised the value of the

soil, put an end to the disfavour attached to the national property,

augmented the resources of the treasury, prevented the extravagance of

the generals, delivered Rome from a turbulent and dangerous populace by

wresting it from degradation and misery. He supported the rehabilitation

of the children of proscripts, because that measure, profoundly

reparative, put an end to one of the great iniquities of the past

regime.

There are victories which enfeeble the conquerors more than the

vanquished. Such was the success of Cicero. The rejection of the

agrarian law, and of the claims of the sons of proscripts, augmented

considerably the number of malcontents. A crowd of citizens, driven by

privations and the denial of justice, went over to swell the ranks of

the conspirators, who, in the shade, were preparing a revolution; and

Cæsar, pained at seeing the Senate reject that sage and ancient policy

which had saved Rome from so many agitations, resolved to undermine by

every means its authority. For this purpose he engaged the tribune, T.

Labienus, the same who was afterwards one of his best lieutenants, to

get up a criminal accusation which was a direct attack upon the abuse

of one of the prerogatives of the government.[942]

[Sidenote: Trial of Rabirius (691).]

III. For a long time, when internal or external troubles were

apprehended, Rome was put, so to speak, in a state of siege, by the

sacramental formula, according to which the consuls were enjoined _to

see that the Republic received no injury_; then the power of the consuls

was unlimited;[943] and often, in seditions, the Senate had profited by

this omnipotence to rid itself of certain factious individuals without

observing the forms of justice. The more frequent the agitations had

become, the more they had used this extreme remedy. The tribunes always

protested ineffectually against a measure which suspended all the

established laws, legalised assassination, and made Rome a battle-field.

Labienus tried anew to blunt in the hands of the Senate so formidable a

weapon.

Thirty-seven years before, as will be remembered, Saturninus, the

violent promoter of an agrarian law, had, by the aid of a riot, obtained

possession of the Capitol; the country had been declared in danger. The

tribune perished in the struggle, and the senator C. Rabirius boasted of

having killed him. Despite this long interval of time, Labienus accused

Rabirius under an old law of _perduellio_, which did not leave to the

guilty, like the law of treason, the power of voluntary exile, but, by

declaring him a public enemy, authorised against him cruel and

ignominious punishments.[944] This procedure provoked considerable

agitation; the Senate, which felt the blow struck at its privileges, was

unwilling to put any one to trial for the execution of an act authorised

by itself. The people and the tribunes, on the contrary, insisted that

the accused should be brought before a tribunal. Every passion was at

work. Labienus claimed to avenge one of his uncles, massacred with

Saturninus; and he had the audacity to expose in the Campus Martius the

portrait of the factious tribune, forgetting the case of Sextus Titius,

condemned, on a former occasion, for the mere fact of having preserved

in his house the likeness of Saturninus.[945] The affair was brought,

according to ancient usage, before the decemvirs. Cæsar, and his cousin

Lucius Cæsar, were designated by the prætor to perform the functions of

judges. The very violence of the accusation, compared with the eloquence

of his defenders, Hortensius and Cicero, overthrew the charge of

_perduellio_. Nevertheless, Rabirius, condemned, appealed to the people;

but the animosity against him was so great that the fatal sentence was

about to be irrevocably pronounced, when the prætor, Metellus Celer,

devised a stratagem to arrest the course of justice; he carried away the

standard planted at the Janiculum.[946] This battered flag formerly

announced an invasion of the country round Rome. Immediately all

deliberation ceased, and the people rushed to arms. The Romans were

great formalists; and, moreover, as this custom left to the magistrates

the power of dissolving at their will the comitia, they had the most

cogent motives for preserving it; the assembly soon separated, and the

affair was not taken up again. Cæsar, nevertheless, had hoped to attain

his object. He did not demand the head of Rabirius, whom, when he was

subsequently dictator, he treated with favour; he only wished to show to

the Senate the strength of the popular party, and to warn it that

henceforth it would no more be permitted, as in the time of the Gracchi,

to sacrifice its adversaries in the name of the public safety.

If, on the one hand, Cæsar let no opportunity escape of branding the

former regime, on the other he was the earnest advocate of the

provinces, which vainly looked for justice and protection from Rome. He

had, for example, the same year accused of peculation C. Calpurnius

Piso, consul in 687, and afterwards governor of Transpadane Gaul, and

brought him to trial for having arbitrarily caused an inhabitant of that

country to be executed. The accused was acquitted through the influence

of Cicero; but Cæsar had shown to the Transpadanes that he was ever the

representative of their interests and their vigilant patron.

[Sidenote: Cæsar Grand Pontiff (691).]

IV. He soon received a brilliant proof of the popularity he enjoyed. The

dignity of sovereign pontiff, one of the most important in the Republic,

was for life, and gave great influence to the individual clothed with

it, for religion mingled itself in all the public and private acts of

the Romans.

Metellus Pius, sovereign pontiff, dying in 691, the most illustrious

citizens, such as P. Servilius Isauricus, and Q. Lutatius Catulus,

prince of the Senate, put themselves at the head of the ranks of

candidates to replace him. Cæsar also solicited the office, and,

desirous of proving himself worthy of it, he published, at this time

doubtless, a very extensive treatise on the augural law, and another on

astronomy, designed to make known in Italy the discoveries of the

Alexandrian school.[947]

Servilius Isauricus and Catulus, relying on their antecedents, and on

the esteem in which they were held, believed themselves the more sure of

election, because, since Sylla, the people had not interfered in the

nomination of grand pontiff, the college solely making the election.

Labienus, to facilitate Cæsar’s access to this high dignity, obtained a

plebiscitum restoring the nomination to the suffrages of the people.

This manœuvre disconcerted the other competitors without discouraging

them, and, as usual, they attempted to seduce the electors with money.

All who held with the party of the nobles united against Cæsar, who

combated solicitation by solicitation, and sustained the struggle by the

aid of considerable loans; he knew how to interest in his success,

according to Appian, both the poor that he had paid, and the rich from

whom he borrowed.[948] Catulus, knowing Cæsar to be greatly in debt, and

mistaking his character, offered him a large sum to desist. He answered

him that he would borrow a much greater sum of him if he would support

his candidature.[949]

At length the great day arrived which was to decide the future of Cæsar;

when he started to present himself at the comitia, the most gloomy

thoughts agitated his ardent mind, and calculating that if he should not

succeed, his debts would constrain him perhaps to go into exile, he

embraced his mother and said, “To-day thou wilt see me grand pontiff or

a fugitive.”[950] The most brilliant success crowned his efforts, and

what added to his joy was his obtaining more votes in the tribes of his

adversaries than they had in all the tribes put together.[951]

Such a victory made the Senate fear whether Cæsar, strong in his

ascendency over the people, might not proceed to the greatest excesses;

but his conduct remained the same.

Hitherto he had inhabited a very moderate house, in the quarter called

Suburra; nominated sovereign pontiff, he was lodged in a public building

in the Via Sacra.[952] This new position necessarily obliged him,

indeed, to a sumptuous life, if we may judge by the luxuriousness

displayed at the reception of a simple pontiff, at which he assisted as

king of the sacrifices, and of which Macrobius has preserved to us the

curious details.[953] Moreover, he built himself a superb villa on the

Lake of Nemi, near Aricia.

[Sidenote: Catiline’s Conspiracy.]

V. Catiline, who has already been spoken of, had twice failed in his

designs upon the consulship; he solicited it again for the year 692,

without abandoning his plans of conspiracy. The moment seemed

favourable. Pompey being in Asia, Italy was bared of troops; Antonius,

associated in the plot, shared the consulship with Cicero. Calm existed

on the surface, whilst passions, half extinguished, and bruised

interests, offered to the first man bold enough, numerous means of

raising commotions.[954] The men whom Sylla had despoiled, as well as

those he had enriched, but who had dissipated the fruits of their

immense plunder, were equally discontented; so that the same idea of

subversion formed a bond of union between the victims and the

accomplices of the past oppression.

Addicted to excesses of every kind, Catiline dreamed, in the midst of

his orgies, of the overthrow of the oligarchy; but we may doubt his

desire to put all to fire and sword, as Cicero says, and as most

historians have repeated after him. Of illustrious birth, questor in

677, he distinguished himself in Macedonia, in the army of Curio; he had

been prætor in 686, and governor of Africa the year following. He was

accused of having in his youth imbrued his hands in Sylla’s murders, of

having associated with the most infamous men, and of having been guilty

of incest and other crimes; there would be no reason for exculpating him

if we did not know how prodigal political parties in their triumph are

of calumnies against the vanquished. Besides, we must acknowledge that

the vices with which he was charged he shared in common with many

personages of that epoch, among others with Antonius, the colleague of

Cicero, who subsequently undertook his defence. Gifted with a high

intelligence and a rare energy, Catiline could not have meditated a

thing so insensate as massacre and burning. It would have been to seek

to reign over ruins and tombs. The truth will present itself better in

the following portrait, traced by Cicero seven years after the death of

Catiline, when, returning to a calmer appreciation, the great orator

painted in less sombre colours him whom he had so disfigured:--“This

Catiline, you cannot have forgotten, I think had, if not the reality, at

least the appearance of the greatest virtues. He associated with a crowd

of perverse men, but he affected to be devoted to men of greatest

estimation. If for him debauchery had powerful attractions, he applied

himself with no less ardour to labour and affairs. The fire of passions

devoured his heart, but he had also a taste for the labours of war. No,

I do not believe there ever existed on this earth a man who offered so

monstrous an assemblage of passions and qualities so varied, so

contrary, and in continual antagonism with each other.”[955]

The conspiracy, conducted by the adventurous spirit of its chief, had

acquired considerable development. Senators, knights, young patricians,

a great number of the notable citizens of the allied towns, partook in

it. Cicero, informed of these designs, assembles the Senate in the

Temple of Concord, and communicates to it the information he had

received: he informs it that, on the 5th of the calends of November, a

rising was to take place in Etruria; that on the morrow a riot would

break out in Rome; that the lives of the consuls were threatened; that,

lastly, everywhere stores of warlike arms and attempts to enlist the

gladiators indicated the most alarming preparations. Catiline,

questioned by the consul, exclaims, that the tyranny of some men, their

avarice, their inhumanity, are the true causes of the uneasiness which

torments the Republic; then, repelling with scorn the projects of revolt

which they imputed to him, he concludes with this threatening figure of

speech: “The Roman people is a robust body, but without head: I shall be

that head.”[956] He departed with these words, leaving the Senate

undecided and trembling. The assembly, meanwhile, passed the usual

decree, enjoining the consuls to watch _that the Republic received no

injury_.

The election of consuls for the following year, till then deferred, took

place on the 21st of October, 691, and Silanus having been nominated

with Murena, Catiline was a third time rejected. He then dispatched to

different parts of Italy his agents, and among others, C. Mallius into

Etruria, Septimius to the Picenum, and C. Julius into Apulia, to

organise the revolt.[957] At the mouth of the Tiber, a division of the

fleet, previously employed against the pirates, was ready to second his

projects.[958] At Rome even the assassination of Cicero was boldly

attempted.

The Senate was convened again on the 8th of November. Catiline dared to

attend, and take his seat in the midst of his colleagues. Cicero, in a

speech which has become celebrated, apostrophised him in terms of the

strongest indignation, and by a crushing denunciation forced him to

retire.[959] Catiline, accompanied by three hundred of his adherents,

left the capital next morning to join Mallius.[960] During the following

days, alarming news arriving from all parts threw Rome into the utmost

anxiety. Stupor reigned there. To the animation of fêtes and pleasures

had, all of a sudden, succeeded a gloomy silence. Troops were raised;

armed outposts were placed at various points; Q. Marcius Rex is

dispatched to Fæsulæ (_Fiesole_); Q. Metellus Creticus into Apulia;

Pomponius Rufus to Capua; Q. Metellus Celer into the Picenum; and,

lastly, the consul, C. Antonius, led an army into Etruria. Cicero had

detached the latter from the conspiracy by giving him the lucrative

government of Macedonia.[961] He accepted in exchange that of Gaul,

which he also subsequently renounced, not wishing, after his consulship,

to quit the city and depart as proconsul. The principal conspirators, at

the head of whom were the prætor Lentulus and Cethegus, remained at

Rome. They continued energetically the preparations for the

insurrection, and entered into communication with the envoys of the

Allobroges. Cicero, secretly informed by his spies, among others by

Curius, watched their doings, and, when he had indisputable proofs,

caused them to be arrested, convoked the Senate, and exposed the plan of

the conspiracy.

Lentulus was obliged to resign the prætorship. Out of nine conspirators

convicted of the attempt against the Republic, five only failed to

escape; they were confided to the custody of the magistrates appointed

by the consul. Lentulus was delivered to his kinsman Lentulus Spinther;

L. Statilius to Cæsar; Gabinius to Crassus; Cethegus to Cornificius; and

Cæparius, who was taken in his flight, to the senator Cn.

Terentius.[962] The Senate was on the point of proceeding against them

in a manner in which all the forms of justice would have been violated.

The criminal judgments were not within its competence, and neither the

consul nor the assembly had the right to condemn a Roman citizen without

the concurrence of the people. Be that as it may, the senators assembled

for a last time on the 5th of December, to deliberate on the punishment

of the conspirators; they were less numerous than on the preceding days.

Many of them were unwilling to pass sentence of death against citizens

belonging to the great patrician families. Some, however, were in favour

of capital punishment, in spite of the law Portia. After others had

spoken, Cæsar made the following speech, the bearing of which merits

particular attention:--

“Conscript fathers, all who deliberate upon doubtful matters ought to be

uninfluenced by hatred, affection, anger, or pity. When we are animated

by these sentiments, it is hard to unravel the truth; and no one has

ever been able to serve at once his passions and his interests. Free

your reason of that which beclouds it, and you will be strong; if

passion invade your mind and rules it, you will be without strength. It

would be here the occasion, conscript fathers, to recall to mind how

many kings and peoples, carried away by rage or pity, have taken fatal

resolutions; but I prefer reminding you how our ancestors, unswayed by

prejudice, performed good and just deeds. In our Macedonian war against

King Perseus, the Republic of Rhodes, in its power and pride, although

it owed its greatness to the support of the Roman people, proved

disloyal and hostile to us; but when, on the termination of this war,

the fate of the Rhodians was brought under deliberation, our ancestors

left them unpunished in order that no one should ascribe the cause of

the war to their riches rather than to their wrongs. So, also, in all

the Punic wars, although the Carthaginians had often, both during peace

and during the truces, committed perfidious atrocities, our fathers, in

spite of the opportunity, never imitated them, because they thought more

of their honour than of vengeance, however just.

“And you, conscript fathers, take care that the crime of P. Lentulus and

his accomplices overcome not the sentiment of your dignity, and consult

not your anger more than your reputation. Indeed, if there be a

punishment adequate to their offences, I will approve the new measure;

but if, on the contrary, the vastness of the crime exceeds all that can

be imagined, we should adhere, I think, to that which has been provided

by the laws.

“Most of those who have expressed their opinion before me have deplored

in studied and magniloquent terms the misfortune of the Republic; they

have recounted the horrors of war and the sufferings of the vanquished,

the rapes of young girls and boys, infants torn from the arms of their

parents, mothers delivered to the lusts of the vanquisher, the pillage

of temples and houses, the carnage and burning everywhere; in short,

arms, corpses, blood, and mourning. But, by the immortal gods, to what

tend these speeches? To make you detest the conspiracy? What! will he

whom a plot so great and so atrocious has not moved, be inflamed by a

speech? No, not so; men never consider their personal injuries slight;

many men resent them too keenly. But, conscript fathers, that which is

permitted to some is not permitted to others. Those who live humbly in

obscurity may err by passion, and few people know it; all is equal with

them, fame and fortune; but those who, invested with high dignities,

pass their life in an exalted sphere, do nothing of which every mortal

is not informed. Thus, the higher the fortune the less the liberty; the

less we ought to be partial, rancorous, and especially angry. What, in

others, is named hastiness, in men of power is called pride and cruelty.

“I think then, conscript fathers, that all the tortures known can never

equal the crimes of the conspirators; but, among most mortals, the last

impressions are permanent, and the crimes of the greatest culprits are

forgotten, to remember only the punishment, if it has been too severe.

“What D. Silanus, a man of constancy and courage, has said, has been

inspired in him, I know, by his zeal for the Republic, and in so grave a

matter he has been swayed neither by partiality nor hatred. I know too

well the wisdom and moderation of that illustrious citizen.

Nevertheless, his advice seems to me, I will not say cruel (for can one

be cruel towards such men?), but contrary to the spirit of our

government. Truly, Silanus, either fear or indignation would have forced

you, consul-elect, to adopt a new kind of punishment. As to fear, it is

superfluous to speak of it, when, thanks to the active foresight of our

illustrious consul, so many guards are under arms. As to the punishment,

we may be permitted to say the thing as it is: in affliction and

misfortune death is the termination of our sufferings, and not a

punishment; it takes away all the ills of humanity; beyond are neither

cares nor joy. But, in the name of the immortal gods, why not add to

your opinion, Silanus, that they shall be forthwith beaten with rods? Is

it because the law Portia forbids it? But other laws also forbid the

taking away the lives of condemned citizens, and prescribe exile. Is it

because it is more cruel to be beaten with rods than to be put to death?

But is there anything too rigorous, too cruel, against men convicted of

so black a design? If, then, this penalty is too light, is it fitting to

respect the law upon a less essential point, and break it in its most

serious part? But, it may be said, who will blame your decree against

the parricides of the Republic? Time, circumstances, and fortune, whose

caprice governs the world. Whatever happens to them, they will have

merited. But you, senators, consider the influence your decision may

have upon other offenders. Abuses often grow from precedents good in

principle; but when the power falls into the hands of men less

enlightened or less honest, a just and reasonable precedent receives an

application contrary to justice and reason.

“The Lacedæmonians imposed upon Athens vanquished a government of thirty

rulers. These began by putting to death without judgment all those whose

crimes marked them out to public hatred; the people rejoiced, and said

it was well done. Afterwards, when the abuses of this power multiplied,

good and bad alike were sacrificed at the instigation of caprice; the

rest were in terror. Thus Athens, crushed under servitude, expiated

cruelly her insensate joy. In our days, when Sylla, conqueror, caused to

be butchered Damasippus and other men of that description, who had

attained to dignities to the curse of the Republic, who did not praise

such a deed? Those villains, those factious men, whose seditions had

harassed the Republic, had, it was said, merited their death. But this

was the signal for a great carnage. For if any one coveted the house or

land of another, or only a vase or vestment, it was somehow contrived

that he should be put in the number of the proscribed. Thus, those to

whom the death of Damasippus had been a subject for joy, were soon

themselves dragged to execution, and the massacres ceased not until

Sylla had gorged all his followers with riches.

“It is true, I dread nothing of the sort, either from M. Tullius or from

present circumstances; but, in a great state, there are so many

different natures! Who knows if at another epoch, under another consul,

master of an army, some imaginary plot may not be believed real? And if

a consul, armed with this example and with a decree of the Senate, once

draw the sword, who will stay his hand or limit vengeance?

“Our ancestors, conscript fathers, were never wanting in prudence or

decision, and pride did not hinder them from adopting foreign customs

provided they appeared good. From the Samnites they borrowed their arms,

offensive and defensive; from the Etruscans, the greater part of the

insignia of our magistrates; in short, all that, amongst their allies

or their enemies, appeared useful to themselves, they appropriated with

the utmost eagerness, preferring to imitate good examples than to be

envious of them. At the same epoch, adopting a Grecian custom, they

inflicted rods upon the citizens, and death upon criminals. Afterwards

the Republic increased; and with the increase of citizens factions

prevailed more, and the innocent were oppressed; they committed many

excesses of this kind. Then the law Portia and many others were

promulgated, which only sanctioned the punishment of exile against the

condemned. This consideration, conscript fathers, is, in my opinion, the

strongest for rejecting the proposed innovation. Certainly those men

were superior to us in virtue and wisdom, who, with such feeble means,

have raised so great an empire, whilst we preserve with difficulty an

inheritance so gloriously acquired. Are we then to set free the guilty,

and increase with them the army of Catiline? In no wise; but I vote that

their goods be confiscated, themselves imprisoned in the municipia best

furnished with armed force, to the end that no one may hereafter propose

their restoration to the Senate or even to the people; that whoever

shall act contrary to this measure be declared by the Senate an enemy of

the State and of the public tranquillity.”[963]

With this noble language, which reveals the statesman, compare the

declamatory speeches of the orators who pleaded for the penalty of

death: “I wish,” cries Cicero, “to snatch from massacre your wives,

your children, and the sainted priestesses of Vesta; from the most

frightful outrages, your temples and sanctuaries; our fair country from

the most horrible conflagration; Italy from devastation....[964] The

conspirators seek to slaughter all, in order that no one may remain to

weep for the Republic, and lament over the ruin of so great an

empire.”[965] And when he speaks of Catiline: “Is there in all Italy a

poisoner, is there a gladiator, a brigand, an assassin, a parricide, a

forger of wills, a suborner, a debauchee, a squanderer, an adulterer; is

there a disreputable woman, a corrupter of youth, a man tarnished in

character, a scoundrel, in short, who does not confess to having lived

with Catiline in the greatest familiarity?”[966] Certainly, this is not

the cool and impartial language which becomes a judge.

Cicero holds cheap the law and its principles; he must have, above all,

arguments for his cause, and he goes to history to seek for facts which

might authorise the putting to death of Roman citizens. He holds forth,

as an example to follow, the murder of Tiberius Gracchus by Scipio

Nasica, and that of Caius Gracchus by the consul Lucius Opimius;[967]

forgetting that but lately, in a famous oration, he had called the two

celebrated tribunes the most brilliant geniuses, the true friends of the

people;[968] and that the murderers of the Gracchi, for having massacred

inviolable personages, became a butt to the hatred and scorn of their

fellow-citizens. Cicero himself will shortly pay with exile for his

rigour towards the accomplices of Catiline.

Cæsar’s speech had such an effect upon the assembly that many of the

senators, amongst others the brother of Cicero, adopted his

opinion.[969] Decimus Silanus, consul-elect, modified his own, and

Cicero at last seemed ready to withdraw from his responsibility, when he

said: “If you adopt the opinion of Cæsar, as he has always attached

himself to the party which passes in the Republic as being that of the

people, it is probable that a sentence of which he shall be the author

and guarantee will expose me less to popular storms.”[970] However, he

persevered in his demand for the immediate execution of the accused. But

Cato mainly decided the vacillating majority of the Senate by words the

most calculated to influence his auditors. Far from seeking to touch the

strings of the higher sentiments and of patriotism, he appeals to

selfish interests and fear. “In the name of the immortal gods,” cried

he, “I adjure you, you, who have ever held your houses, your lands, your

statues, your pictures, in greater regard than the Republic, if these

goods, of whatever kind they be, you desire to preserve; if for your

enjoyments you would economise a necessary leisure; rise at last from

your lethargy, and take in hand the Republic;”[971] which means, in

other terms: “If you wish to enjoy peaceably your riches, condemn the

accused without hearing them.” This is what the Senate did.

A singular incident happened, in the midst of these debates, to show to

what point Cæsar had awakened people’s suspicions. At the most animated

moment of the discussion, a letter was brought to him. He read it with

eagerness. Cato and other senators, supposing it to be a message from

one of the conspirators, insisted upon its being read to the Senate.

Cæsar handed the letter to Cato, who was seated near him. The latter saw

it was a love-letter from his sister Servilia, and threw it back

indignantly, crying out, “There! keep it, drunkard!”[972] a gratuitous

insult, since he himself did justice to the temperance of Cæsar the day

when he said that, of all the men who had overthrown the State, he was

the only one who had done it fasting.[973] Cato expressed with still

greater force the fears of his party when he said: “If, in the midst of

such great and general alarms, Cæsar alone is without fear, it is for

you as well as me an additional motive for fear.”[974] Cato went

further. After the condemnation of the accused to death, he tried to

drive Cæsar to extremities by turning against them an opinion which the

latter had expressed in their interest: he proposed to confiscate their

goods. The debate became then warmer than ever. Cæsar declared that it

was an indignity, after having rejected the humane part of his opinion,

to adopt from it the rigorous spirit it contained, for the purpose of

aggravating the lot of the condemned and adding to their

punishment.[975] As his protestation met with no echo in the Senate, he

adjured the tribunes to use their right of intercession, but they

remained deaf to his appeal. The agitation was at its height, and to put

an end to it, the consul, in haste to terminate a struggle the issue of

which might become doubtful, agreed that the confiscation should not

form a part of the _Senatus-consultum_.

Whilst the populace outside, excited by the friends of the conspirators,

raised seditious clamours, the knights who formed the guard around the

Temple of Concord, exasperated by the language of Cæsar and the length

of the debates, broke in upon the assembly; they surrounded Cæsar, and

with threatening words, despite his rank of pontiff and of prætor-elect,

they drew their swords upon him, which M. Curio and Cicero generously

turned aside.[976] Their protection enabled him to regain his home: he

declared, however, that he would not appear again in the Senate until

the new consuls could ensure order and liberty for the deliberations.

Cicero, without loss of time, went with the prætors to seek the

condemned, and conducted them to the prison of the Capitol, where they

were immediately executed. Then a restless crowd, ignorant of what was

taking place, demanding what had become of the prisoners, Cicero replied

with these simple words, “They have lived.”[977]

We are easily convinced that Cæsar was not a conspirator; but this

accusation is explained by the pusillanimity of some and the rancour of

others. Who does not know that in times of crisis, feeble governments

always tax sympathy for the accused with complicity, and are not sparing

of calumny towards their adversaries? Q. Catulus and C. Piso were

animated against him with so deep a hatred that they had importuned the

consul to include him in the prosecutions directed against the

accomplices of Catiline. Cicero resisted. The report of his

participation in the plot was not the less spread, and had been

accredited eagerly by the crowd of the envious.[978] Cæsar was not one

of the conspirators; if he had been, his influence would have been

sufficient to have acquitted them triumphantly.[979] He had too high an

idea of himself; he enjoyed too great a consideration to think of

arriving at power by an underground way and reprehensible means. However

ambitious a man may be, he does not conspire when he can attain his end

by lawful means. Cæsar was quite sure of being raised to the consulship,

and his impatience never betrayed his ambition. Moreover, he had

constantly shown a marked aversion to civil war; and why should he throw

himself into a vulgar conspiracy with infamous individuals, he who

refused his participation in the attempts of Lepidus when at the head of

an army? If Cicero had believed Cæsar guilty, would he have hesitated to

accuse him, seeing he scrupled not to compromise, by the aid of a false

witness, so high a personage as Licinius Crassus?[980] How, on the eve

of the condemnation, could he have trusted to Cæsar the custody of one

of the conspirators? Would he have exculpated him in the sequel when the

accusation was renewed? Lastly, if Cæsar, as will be seen afterwards,

according to Plutarch, preferred being the first in a village in the

Alps to being second in Rome, how could he have consented to be the

second to Catiline?

The attitude of Cæsar in this matter presents nothing, then, which does

not admit an easy explanation. Whilst blaming the conspiracy, he was

unwilling that, to repress it, the eternal rules of justice should be

set aside. He reminded men, blinded by passion and fear, that

unnecessary rigour is always followed by fatal reactions. The examples

drawn from history served him to prove that moderation is always the

best adviser. It is clear also that, whilst despising most of the

authors of the conspiracy, he was not without sympathy for a cause which

approached his own by common instincts and enemies. In countries

delivered up to party divisions, how many men are there not who desire

the overthrow of the existing government, yet without the will to take

part in a conspiracy? Such was the position of Cæsar.

On the contrary, the conduct of Cicero and of the Senate can hardly be

justified. To violate the law was perhaps a necessity; but to

misrepresent the sedition in order to make it odious, to have recourse

to calumny to vilify the criminals, and to condemn them to death without

allowing them a defence, was an evident proof of weakness. In fact, if

the intentions of Catiline had not been disguised, the whole of Italy

would have responded to his appeal, so weary were people of the

humiliating yoke which weighed upon Rome; but they proclaimed him as one

meditating conflagration, murder, and pillage. “Already,” it was said,

“the torches are lit, the assassins are at their posts, the conspirators

drink human blood, and dispute over the shreds of a man they have

butchered.”[981] It was by these rumours dexterously spread, by these

exaggerations which Cicero himself afterwards ridiculed,[982] that the

disposition of the people, at first favourable to the insurrection, soon

turned against it.[983]

That Catiline might have associated, like all promoters of revolutions,

with men who had nothing to lose and everything to gain, cannot be

disputed; but how can we believe that the majority of his accomplices

was composed of criminals loaded with vices? By the confession of

Cicero, many honourable individuals figured amongst the

conspirators.[984] Inhabitants of colonies and municipia belonging to

the first families in their country, allied themselves with Catiline.

Many sons of senators, and amongst others Aulus Fulvius,[985] were

arrested on their way to join the insurgents, and put to death by the

order of their fathers. Nearly all the Roman youth, says Sallust,

favoured at that time the designs of the bold conspirator, and, on the

other hand, throughout the whole empire, the populace, eager for

novelty, approved of his enterprise.[986]

That Catiline may have been a perverse and cruel man of the kind of

Marius and Sylla, is probable; that he wished to arrive at power by

violence, is certain; but that he had gained to his cause so many

important individuals, that he had inspired their enthusiasm, that he

had so profoundly agitated the peoples of Italy, without having

proclaimed one great or generous idea, is not probable. Indeed, although

attached to the party of Sylla by his antecedents, he knew that the only

standard capable of rallying numerous partisans was that of Marius. Thus

for a long time he preserved in his house, with a religious care, the

silver eagle which had guided the legions of that illustrious

captain.[987] His speeches confirm still further this view: in

addressing himself to his accomplices, he laments seeing the destinies

of the Republic in the hands of a faction who excluded the greatest

number from all participation in honours and riches.[988] He wrote to

Catulus, a person of the highest respect, with whom he was intimate, the

following letter, deficient neither in simplicity nor in a certain

grandeur, the calmness of which offers a striking contrast to the

vehemence of Cicero:--

“L. Catiline to Q. Catulus, salutation,--Thy tried friendship, which has

always been precious to me, gives me the assurance that in my misfortune

thou wilt hear my prayer. I do not wish to justify the part I have

taken. My conscience reproaches me with nothing, and I wish only to

expose my motives, which truly thou wilt find lawful. Driven to

extremity by the insults and injustices of my enemies, robbed of the

recompense due to my services, finally hopeless of ever obtaining the

dignity to which I am entitled, I have taken in hand, according to my

custom, the common cause of all the unfortunate. I am represented as

constrained by debts to this bold resolution: it is a calumny. My

personal means are sufficient to acquit my engagements; and it is known

that, thanks to the generosity of my wife and of her daughter, I have

done honour to other engagements which were foreign to me. But I cannot

see with composure unworthy men at the pinnacle of honours, whilst they

drive me away from them with groundless accusations. In the extremity to

which they have thus reduced me, I embrace the only part that remains

to a man of heart to defend his political position. I should like to

write more fully, but I hear they are setting on foot against me the

last degree of violence. I commend to thee Orestilla, and confide her to

thy faith. Protect her, I beseech thee, by the head of thy children.

Adieu.”

The same sentiments inspired the band of conspirators commanded by

Mallius. They reveal themselves in these words: “We call gods and men to

witness that it is not against our country that we have taken up arms,

nor against the safety of our fellow-citizens. We, wretched paupers as

we are, who, through the violence and cruelty of usurers, are without

country, all condemned to scorn and indigence, are actuated by one only

wish, to guarantee our personal security against wrong. We demand

neither power nor wealth, those great and eternal causes of war and

strife among mankind. We only desire freedom, a treasure that no man

will surrender except with life itself. We implore you, senators, have

pity on your wretched fellow-citizens.”[989]

These quotations indicate with sufficient clearness the real character

of the insurrection; and that the partisans of Catiline did not

altogether deserve contempt is proved by their energy and resolution.

The Senate having declared Catiline and Mallius enemies of their

country, promised a free pardon and two hundred thousand sestertii[990]

to all who would abandon the ranks of the insurgents; “but not one,”

says Sallust,[991] “of so vast an assemblage, was persuaded by the lure

of the reward to betray the plot; not one deserted from the camp of

Catiline, so deadly was the disease, which, like a pestilence, had

infected the minds of most of the citizens.” There is no doubt that

Catiline, though without a conscience and without principles, had

notwithstanding good feeling enough to maintain a cause that he wished

to see ennobled, because, so far from offering freedom to the slaves, as

Sylla, Marius, and Cinna had done, an example so full of charms for a

conspirator,[992] he refused to make use of them, in despite of the

advice of Lentulus, who addressed him in these pregnant words: “Outlawed

from Rome, what purpose can a Catiline have in refusing the services of

slaves?”[993] Finally, that among these insurgents, who are represented

to us as a throng of robbers, ready to melt away without striking a

blow,[994] there existed, notwithstanding, a burning faith and a genuine

fanaticism, is proved by the heroism of their final struggle. The two

armies met in the plain of Pistoja, on the 5th of January, 692: a

terrible battle ensued, and though victory was hopeless, not one of

Catiline’s soldiers gave way. To a man they were slain, following the

example of their leader, sword in hand; all were found lifeless, but

with ranks unbroken, heaped round the eagle of Marius,[995] that

glorious relic of the campaign against the Cimbri, that venerated

standard of the cause of the people.

We must admit that Catiline was guilty of an attempt to overthrow the

laws of his country by violence; but in doing so he was only following

the examples of a Marius and a Sylla. His dreams were of a revolutionary

despotism, of the ruin of the aristocratic party, and, according to Dio

Cassius,[996] of a change in the constitution of the Republic, and of

the subjugation of the allies. Yet would his success have been a

misfortune: a permanent good can never be the production of hands that

are not clean.[997]

[Sidenote: Error of Cicero.]

VI. Cicero believed that he had destroyed an entire party. He was wrong:

he had only foiled a conspiracy, and disencumbered a grand cause of the

rash men who were compromising it. The judicial murder of the

conspirators gave them new life, and one day the tomb of Catiline was

found covered with flowers.[998] Laws may be justly broken when society

is hurrying on to its own ruin, and a desperate remedy is indispensable

for its salvation; and again, when the government, supported by the mass

of the people, becomes the organ of its interests and their hopes. But

when, on the contrary, a nation is divided into factions, and the

government represents only one of them, its duty, if it intends to foil

a plot, is to bind itself to the most exact and scrupulous respect for

the law; for at such a juncture every measure not sanctioned by the

letter of the law appears to be due rather to a selfish feeling of

interest than to a desire for the general weal; and the majority of the

public, indifferent or hostile, is always disposed to pity the accused,

whoever he may be, and to blame the severity with which he was put down.

Cicero was intoxicated with his success. His vanity made him

ridiculous.[999] He thought himself as great as Pompey, and wrote to him

with all the pride of a conqueror. But he received a chilling

answer,[1000] and in a short time saw the accomplishment of Cæsar’s

prophetic words: “If even the greatest criminals are too severely dealt

with, the heinousness of their offence is lost in the severity of their

sentence.”[1001]

Even before the battle of Pistoja, whilst the pursuit of the adherents

of Catiline was still being prosecuted, public opinion was already

hostile to him who had urged the measure, and Metellus Nepos, sent

recently from Asia by Pompey, openly found fault with Cicero’s conduct.

When the latter, on quitting office, wished to address the people for

the purpose of glorifying his consulship, Metellus, who had been elected

tribune, silenced him with these words: “We will not hear the defence

of the man who refused to hear the defence of accused persons,” and

ordered him to confine himself to the usual oath, that he had in no way

contravened the laws. “I swear,” answered Cicero, “that I have saved the

Republic.” However loudly this boastful exclamation might be applauded

by Cato and the bystanders, who hail him with Father of his Country,

their enthusiasm will have but a short duration.[1002]

[Sidenote: Cæsar Prætor (692).]

VII. Cæsar, prætor-elect of the city (_urbanus_) the preceding year,

entered upon his office in the year 692. Bibulus, his former colleague

in the edileship, and his declared opponent, was his colleague. The more

his influence increased, the more he seems to have placed it at the

service of Pompey, upon whom, since his departure, the hopes of the

popular party rested. He had more share than all the others in causing

extraordinary honours to be decreed to the conqueror of

Mithridates,[1003] such as the privilege of attending the games of the

circus in a robe of triumph and a crown of laurels, and of sitting in

the theatre in the official dress of the magistrates, the

_prætexta_.[1004] Still more, he used all his endeavours to reserve for

Pompey one of those opportunities of gratifying personal vanity which

the Romans prized so highly.

It was the custom for those who were charged with the restoration of any

public monument to have their name engraved on it when the work was

completed. Catulus had caused his to be inscribed on the Temple of

Jupiter, burnt in the Capitol in 671, and of which he had been intrusted

with the rebuilding by Sylla. This temple, however, had not been

entirely completed. Cæsar appealed against this infraction of the law,

accused Catulus of having appropriated a part of the money intended for

the restoration, and proposed that the completion of the work should be

confided to Pompey on his return, that his name should be placed thereon

instead of that of Catulus, and that he should perform the ceremony of

dedication.[1005] Cæsar thus not only gave a proof of deference to

Pompey, but he sought to please the multitude by gaining a verdict

against one of the most esteemed chiefs of the aristocratic party.

The news of this accusation caused a sensation in the Senate, and the

eagerness with which the nobles hurried into the Forum to vote against

the proposal was such, that on that day they omitted to go, according to

custom, to congratulate the new consuls; a proof that in this case also

it was entirely a question of party. Catulus pronounced his own defence,

but without being able to gain the tribune; and the tumult increasing,

Cæsar was obliged to give way to force. The affair went no

farther.[1006]

The reaction of public opinion against the conduct of the Senate

continued, and men did not hesitate to accuse it openly of having

murdered the accomplices of Catiline. Metellus Nepos, supported by the

friends of the conspirators, by the partisans of his patron, and by

those of Cæsar, proposed a law for the recall of Pompey with his army,

that he might, as he said, maintain order in the city, protect the

citizens, and prevent their being put to death without a trial. The

Senate, and notably Cato and Q. Minucius, offended already by the

success of the army of Asia, offered a steady resistance to these

proposals.

On the day when the tribes voted, scenes of the greatest turbulence took

place. Cato seated himself between the prætor Cæsar and the tribune

Metellus, to prevent their conversing together. Blows were given, swords

were drawn,[1007] and each of the two factions was in turn driven from

the Forum; until at last the senatorial party gained the day. Metellus,

obliged to fly, declared that he was yielding to force, and that he was

going to join Pompey, who would know well how to avenge them both. It

was the first time that a tribune had been known to abandon Rome and

take refuge in the camp of a general. The Senate deprived him of his

office, and Cæsar of that of prætor.[1008] The latter paid no attention,

kept his lictors, and continued the administration of justice; but, on

being warned that it was intended to make use of compulsion against him,

he voluntarily resigned his office, and shut himself up in his house.

Nevertheless, this outrage against the laws was not submitted to with

indifference. Two days afterwards, a crowd assembled before Cæsar’s

house: the people with loud cries urged him to resume his office; while

Cæsar, on his part, engaged them not to transgress the laws. The Senate,

which had met on hearing of this riot, sent for him, thanked him for his

respect for the laws, and reinstated him in his prætorship.

It was thus that Cæsar maintained himself within the pale of the law,

and obliged the Senate to overstep it. This body, heretofore so firm,

and yet so temperate, no longer shrank from extraordinary acts of

authority; a tribune and a prætor were at the same time obliged to fly

from their arbitrary proceedings. Ever since the days of the Gracchi,

Rome had witnessed the same scenes of violence, sometimes on the part of

the nobles, at others on the part of the people.

The justice which the fear of a popular movement had caused to be

rendered to Cæsar had not discouraged the hatred of his enemies. They

tried to renew against him the accusation of having been an accomplice

in Catiline’s conspiracy. At their instigation, Vettius, a man who had

been formerly employed by Cicero as a spy to discover the plot, summoned

him before the questor Novius Niger;[1009] and Curius, to the latter of

whom a public reward had been decreed, accused him before the Senate.

They both swore to his enrolment among the conspirators, pretending that

they had received their information from the lips of Catiline himself.

Cæsar had no difficulty in defending himself, and appealed to the

testimony of Cicero, who at once declared his innocence. The court,

however, sat for a long time; and the rumour of the charge having been

spread abroad in the city, the crowd, uneasy as to what might be Cæsar’s

fate, assembled in great numbers to demand his release. So irritated

they appeared, that to calm them, Cato conceived it necessary to propose

to the Senate a decree ordering a distribution of wheat to the poor: a

largess which cost the treasury more than 1,250 talents yearly

(7,276,250 francs [£291,050]).[1010]

No time was lost in pronouncing the charge calumnious; Curius was

deprived of his promised reward; and Vettius, on his way to prison, was

all but torn to pieces before the rostra.[1011] The questor Nevius was

in like manner arrested for having allowed a prætor, whose authority was

superior to his own, to be accused before his tribunal.[1012]

Not satisfied with conciliating the good-will of the people, Cæsar won

for himself the favour of the noblest dames of Rome; and,

notwithstanding his notorious passion for women, we cannot help

discovering a political aim in his choice of mistresses, since all held

by different ties to men who were then playing, or were destined to

play, an important part. He had had important relations with Tertulla,

the wife of Crassus; with Mucia, wife of Pompey; with Lollia, wife of

Aulus Gabinius, who was consul in 696; with Postumia, wife of Servius

Sulpicius, who was raised to the consulship in 703, and persuaded to

join Cæsar’s party by her influence; but the woman he preferred was

Servilia, sister of Cato and mother of Brutus, to whom, during his first

consulship, he gave a pearl valued at six millions of sestertii

(1,140,000 francs [£45,600]).[1013] This connection throws an air of

improbability over the reports in circulation that Servilia favoured an

intrigue between him and her daughter Tertia.[1014] Was it by the

intermediation of Tertulla that Crassus was reconciled with Cæsar? or

was that reconciliation due to the injustice of the Senate, and the

jealousy of Crassus towards Pompey? Whatever was the cause that brought

them together, Crassus seems to have made common cause with him in all

the questions in which he was interested, subsequent to the consulship

of Cicero.

[Sidenote: Attempt of Clodius (692).]

VIII. At this period a great scandal arose. A young and wealthy

patrician, named Clodius, an ambitious and violent man, conceived a

passion for Pompeia, Cæsar’s wife; but the strict vigilance of Aurelia,

her mother-in-law, made it difficult to find opportunities for meeting

privately.[1015] Clodius, disguised in female apparel, chose, for the

opportunity to enter her house, the moment when she was celebrating, by

night, attended by the matrons, mysteries in honour of the Roman

people.[1016] Now, it was forbidden to a male to be present at these

religious ceremonies, which it was believed that his presence even would

defile. Clodius, recognised by a female slave, was expelled with

ignominy. The pontiffs uttered the cry of sacrilege, and it became the

duty of the vestals to begin the mysteries anew. The nobles, who had

already met with an enemy in Clodius, saw in this act a means to compass

his overthrow, and at the same time to compromise Cæsar. The latter,

without condescending to inquire whether Pompeia was guilty or not,

repudiated her. A decree of the Senate, carried by four hundred votes

against fifteen, decided that Clodius must take his trial.[1017] He

defended himself by pleading an _alibi_; and, with the sole exception of

Aurelia, not a witness came forward against him. Cæsar himself, when

examined, declared that he knew nothing; and when asked to explain his

own conduct, replied, with equal regard to his honour and his interest,

“The wife of Cæsar must be above suspicion!” But Cicero, yielding to the

malicious suggestions of his wife Terentia, came forward to assert that

on the day of the event he had seen Clodius in Rome.[1018] The people

showed its sympathy with the latter, either because they deemed the

crime one that did not deserve a severe punishment, or because their

religious scruples were not so strong as their political passions.

Crassus, on his part, directed the whole intrigue, and lent the accused

funds sufficient to buy his judges. They acquitted him by a majority of

thirty-one to twenty-five.[1019]

The Senate, indignant at this contradiction, passed, on the motion of

Cato, a bill of indictment against the judges who had suffered

themselves to be bribed. But as they happened to be knights, the

equestrian order made common cause with them, and openly separated

themselves from the Senate. Thus the outrage of Clodius had two serious

consequences: first, it proved in a striking manner the venality of

justice; secondly, it once more threw the knights into the arms of the

popular party. But far other steps were taken to alienate them. The

farmers of the revenue demanded a reduction in the price of the rents of

Asia, on the ground that they had been leased to them at a price that

had become too high in consequence of the wars. The opposition of Cato

caused their demand to be refused. This refusal, though doubtless legal,

was, under the circumstances, in the highest degree impolitic.

[Sidenote: Pompey’s Triumphal Return (692).]

IX. Whilst at Rome dissensions were breaking out on all occasions,

Pompey had just brought the war in Asia to a close. Having defeated

Mithridates in two battles, he had compelled him to fly towards the

sources of the Euphrates, to pass thence into the north of Armenia, and

finally to cross thence to Dioscurias, in Colchis, on the western shore

of the Black Sea.[1020] Pompey had advanced as far as the Caucasus,

where he had defeated two mountain tribes, the Albanians and the

Iberians, who disputed his passage. When he had arrived within three

days’ march of the Caspian, having nothing more to fear from

Mithridates, and surrounded by barbarians, he began his retreat through

Armenia, where Tigranes came to tender his submission. Next, taking a

southerly course, he crossed Mount Taurus, attacked the King of

Commagene, fought a battle with the King of Media, invaded Syria, made

alliance with the Parthians, received the submission of the Nabathæan

Arabs and of Aristobulus, king of the Jews, and took Jerusalem.[1021]

During this period, Mithridates, whose energy and whose views appeared

to expand in proportion to his dangers and his reverses, was executing a

bold scheme. He had passed round by the eastern coast of the Black Sea,

and, allying himself with the Scythians and the peoples of the Crimea,

he had reached the shores of the Cimmerian Hellespont; but he had still

more gigantic designs in his mind. His idea was to open communications

with the Celts, and so reach the Danube, traverse Thrace, Macedonia, and

Illyria, cross the Alps, and, like Hannibal, descend upon Italy. Alone,

he was great enough to conceive this enterprise, but he was obliged to

give it up; his army deserted him, Pharnaces his son betrayed him, and

he committed suicide at Panticapæum (_Kertch_). By this event the vast

and rich territories that lie between the Caspian and the Red Sea were

placed at the disposal of Pompey. Pharnaces received the kingdom of the

Bosphorus. Tigranes, deprived of a portion of his dominions, only

preserved Armenia. Deiotarus, tetrarch of Galatia, obtained an increase

of territory, and Ariobarzanes obtained an enlargement of the kingdom of

Cappadocia, which was re-established in his favour. Various minor

princes devoted to the Roman interests received endowments, and

thirty-nine towns were rebuilt or founded. Finally, Pontus, Cilicia,

Syria, Phœnicia, declared to be Roman provinces, were obliged to

accept the constitution imposed upon them by the conqueror. These

countries received institutions which they preserved through several

centuries.[1022] All the shores of the Mediterranean, with the exception

of Egypt, became tributaries of Rome.

The war in Asia terminated, Pompey sent before him his lieutenant,

Pupius Piso Calpurnianus, who was soliciting the consulship, and who for

that reason requested an adjournment of the elections. This adjournment

was granted, and Piso unanimously elected consul for the year 693,[1023]

with M. Valerius Messala; to such a degree did the terror of Pompey’s

name make every one eager to grant what he desired. For no one knew his

designs; and it was feared lest, on his return, he should again march

upon Rome at the head of his victorious army. But Pompey, having landed

at Brundusium about the month of January, 693, disbanded his army, and

arrived at Rome, escorted only by the citizens who had gone out in

crowds to meet him.[1024]

After the first display of public gratitude, he found his reception

different from that on which he had reckoned, and domestic griefs came

to swell the catalogue of his disappointments. He had been informed of

the scandalous conduct of his wife Mutia during his absence, and

determined to repudiate her.[1025]

Envy, that scourge of a Republic, raged against him. The nobles did not

conceal their jealousy: it seemed as though they were taking revenge for

their own apprehensions, to which they were now adding their own

feelings of personal resentment. Lucullus had not forgiven him for

having frustrated his expectation of the command of the army of Asia.

Crassus was jealous of his renown; Cato, always hostile to those who

raised themselves above their fellows, could not be favourable to him,

and had even refused him the hand of his niece; Metellus Creticus

cherished a bitter remembrance of attempts which had been made to wrest

from him the merit of conquering Crete;[1026] and Metellus Celer was

offended at the repudiation of his sister Mutia.[1027] As for Cicero,

whose opinion of men varied according to their more or less deference

for his merit, he discovered that his hero of other days was destitute

of rectitude and greatness of soul.[1028] Pompey, foreseeing the

ill-feeling he was about to encounter, exerted all his influence, and

spent a large sum of money to secure the election of Afranius, one of

his old lieutenants, as consul. He reckoned upon him to obtain the two

things which he desired most: a general approval of all his acts in the

East, and a distribution of lands to his veterans. Notwithstanding

violent opposition, Afranius was elected with Q. Metellus Celer. But,

before proposing the laws which concerned him, Pompey, who till then had

not entered Rome, demanded a triumph. It was granted him, but for two

days only. However, the pageant was not less remarkable for its

splendour. It was held on the 29th and 30th of September, 693.

Before him were carried boards on which were inscribed the names of the

conquered countries, from Judæa to the Caucasus, and from the shores of

the Bosphorus to the banks of the Euphrates; the names of the towns and

the number of the vessels taken from the pirates; the names of

thirty-nine towns re-peopled; the amount of wealth brought in to the

treasury, amounting to 20,000 talents (more than 115 millions of francs

[£4,600,000]), without counting his largesses to his soldiers, of whom

he who received least had 1,500 drachmas (1,455 francs [£57]).[1029] The

public revenues, which before Pompey’s time amounted only to fifty

millions of drachmas (forty-eight millions and a half of francs [nearly

two millions sterling]), reached the amount of eighty-one millions and a

half (seventy-nine millions of francs [£3,160,000]). Among the precious

objects that were exposed before the eyes of the Romans was the

Dactylotheca (or collection of engraved stones) belonging to the King of

Pontus;[1030] a chessboard made of only two precious stones, but which,

nevertheless, measured four feet in length by three in breadth,

ornamented with a moon in gold, weighing thirty pounds; three couches

for dinner, of immense value; vases of gold and precious stones numerous

enough to load nine sideboards; thirty-three chaplets of pearls; three

gold statues, representing Minerva, Mars, and Apollo; a mountain of the

same metal, on a square base, decorated with fruits of all kinds, and

with figures of stags and lions, the whole encircled by a golden vine, a

present from King Aristobulus; a miniature temple dedicated to the

Muses, and provided with a clock; a couch of gold, said to have belonged

to Darius, son of Hystaspes; murrhine vases;[1031] a statue in silver of

Pharnaces, king of Pontus, the conqueror of Sinope, and the contemporary

of Philip III. of Macedon;[1032] a silver statue of the last

Mithridates, and a colossal bust of him in gold, eight cubits high,

together with his throne and sceptre; chariots armed with scythes, and

enriched with gilt ornaments;[1033] then, the portrait of Pompey

himself, embroidered in pearls. Lastly, trees were now introduced for

the first time as rare and precious objects: these were the ebony-tree

and the shrub which produces balsam.[1034] Before the chariot of Pompey

came the Cretan Lasthenes and Panares, taken from the triumph of

Metellus Creticus;[1035] the chiefs of the pirates; the son of Tigranes,

king of Armenia, his wife, and his daughter; the widow of the elder

Tigranes, called Zosima; Olthaces, chief of the Colchians; Aristobulus,

king of the Jews; the sister of Mithridates, with five of his sons; the

wives of the chieftains of Scythia; the hostages of the Iberians and

Albanians, and those of the princes of Commagene. Pompey was in a

chariot, adorned with jewels, and dressed in the costume of Alexander

the Great;[1036] and as he had already three times obtained the honours

of a triumph for his successes in Africa, Europe, and Asia, a grand

trophy was displayed, with this inscription, “Over the whole

world!”[1037]

So much splendour flattered the national pride, without disarming the

envious. Victories in the East had always been obtained without

extraordinary efforts, and therefore people had always depreciated their

merit, and Cato went so far as to say that in Asia a general had only

women to fight against.[1038] In the Senate, Lucullus, and other

influential men of consular rank, threw out the decree that was to

ratify all the acts of Pompey; and yet, to refuse to ratify either the

treaties concluded with the kings, or the exchange of the provinces, or

the amount of tribute imposed upon the vanquished, was as though they

questioned all that he had done. But they went still farther.

Towards the month of January, 694, the tribune L. Flavius proposed[1039]

to purchase and appropriate to Pompey’s veterans, for purposes of

colonisation, all the territory that had been declared public domain in

the year 521, and since sold; and to divide among the poor citizens the

_ager publicus_ of Volaterræ and Arretium, cities of Etruria, which had

been confiscated by Sylla, but not yet distributed.[1040] The expense

entailed by these measures was to be defrayed by five years’ revenue of

the conquered provinces.[1041] Cicero, who wished to gratify Pompey,

without damaging the interests of those he termed his rich

friends,[1042] proposed that the _ager publicus_ should be left intact,

but that other lands of equal value should be purchased. Nevertheless,

he was in favour of the establishment of colonies, though two years

before he had called the attention of his hearers to the danger of such

establishments; he was ready to admit that that dangerous populace,

those dregs of the city (_sentina urbis_), must be removed to a distance

from Rome, though in former days he had engaged that same populace to

remain in Rome, and enjoy their festivals, their games, and their

rights of suffrage.[1043] Finally, he proposed to buy private estates,

and leave the _ager publicus_ intact; whereas, in his speech against

Rullus, he had blamed the establishment of colonies on private estates

as a violation of all precedent.[1044] The eloquence of the orator,

which had been powerful enough to cause the rejection of the law of

Rullus, was unsuccessful in obtaining the adoption of that of Flavius;

it was attacked with such violence by the consul Metellus, that the

tribune caused him to be put in prison; but this act of severity having

met with a general disapproval, Pompey was alarmed at the scandal, and

bade Flavius set the consul at liberty, and abandoned the law. Sensitive

to so many insults, and seeing his prestige diminish, the conqueror of

Mithridates regretted that he had disbanded his army, and determined to

make common cause with Clodius, who then enjoyed an extraordinary

popularity.[1045]

About the same period, Metellus Nepos, who had returned a second time to

Italy with Pompey, was elected prætor, and obtained a law to abolish

tolls throughout Italy, the exaction of which had hitherto given rise to

loud complaints. This measure, which had probably been suggested by

Pompey and Cæsar, met with general approval; yet the Senate made an

unsuccessful attempt to have the name of the proposer erased from the

law: which shows, as Dio Cassius says, that that assembly accepted

nothing from its adversaries, not even an act of kindness.[1046]

[Sidenote: Destiny regulates Events.]

X. Thus all the forces of society, paralysed by intestine divisions, and

powerless for good, appeared to revive only for the purpose of throwing

obstacles in its way. Military glory and eloquence, those two

instruments of Roman power, inspired only distrust and envy. The triumph

of the generals was regarded not so much as a success for the Republic

as a source of personal gratification. The gift of eloquence still

exercised its ancient empire, so long as the orator remained upon the

tribune; but scarcely had he stepped down before the impression he had

made was gone; the people remained indifferent to brilliant displays of

rhetoric that were employed to encourage selfish passions, and not to

defend, as heretofore, the great interests of the fatherland.

It is well worthy of our attention that, when destiny is driving a state

of things towards an aim, there is, by a law of fate, a concurrence of

all forces in the same direction. Thither tend alike the attacks and the

hopes of those who seek change; thither tend the fears and the

resistance of those who would put a stop to every movement. After the

death of Sylla, Cæsar was the only man who persevered in his endeavours

to raise the standard of Marius. Hence nothing more natural than that

his acts and speeches should bend in the same direction. But the fact on

which we ought to fix our attention is, the spectacle of the partisans

of resistance and the system of Sylla, the opponents of all innovation,

helping, unconsciously, the progress of the events which smoothed for

Cæsar the way to supreme power.

Pompey, the representative of the cause of the Senate, gives the hardest

blow to the ancient régime by re-establishing the tribuneship. The

popularity which his prodigious successes in the East had won for him,

had raised him above all others; by nature, as well as by his

antecedents, he leaned to the aristocratic party; the jealousy of the

nobles throws him into the popular party and into the arms of Cæsar.

The Senate, on its part, while professing to aim at the preservation of

all the old institutions intact, abandons them in the presence of

danger; through jealousy of Pompey, it leaves to the tribunes the

initiative in all laws of general interest; through fear of Catiline, it

lowers the barriers that had been raised between new men and the

consulship, and confers that office upon Cicero. In the trial of the

accomplices of Catiline, it violates both the forms of justice and the

chief safeguard of the liberty of the citizens, the right of appeal to

the people. Instead of remembering that the best policy in circumstances

of peril is to confer upon men of importance some brilliant mark of

acknowledgment for the services they have rendered to the State, either

in good or bad fortune; instead of following, after victory, the example

given after defeat by the ancient Senate, which thanked Varro because he

had not despaired of the Republic, the Senate shows itself ungrateful to

Pompey, gives him no credit for his moderation, and, when it can

compromise him, and even bind him by the bonds of gratitude, it meets

his most legitimate demands with a refusal, a refusal which will teach

generals to come, that, when they return to Rome, though they have

increased the territory of the Commonwealth, though they have doubled

the revenues of the Republic, if they disband their army, the approval

of their acts will be disputed, and an attempt made to bargain with

their soldiers for the reward due to their glorious labours.

Cicero himself, who is desirous of maintaining the old state of things,

undermines it by his language. In his speeches against Verres, he

denounces the venality of the Senate, and the extortions of which the

provinces complain; in others, he unveils in a most fearful manner the

corruption of morals, the traffic in offices, and the dearth of

patriotism among the upper classes; in pleading for the Manilian law, he

maintains that there is need of a strong power in the hands of one

individual to ensure order in Italy and glory abroad; and it is after he

has exhausted all the eloquence at his command in pointing out the

excess of the evil and the efficacy of the remedy, that he thinks it is

possible to stay the stream of public opinion by the chilling counsel of

immobility.

Cato declared that he was for no innovations whatever; yet he made them

more than ever indispensable by his own opposition. No less than Cicero,

he threw the blame on the vices of society; but whilst Cicero wavered

often through the natural fickleness of his mind, Cato, with the

systematic tenacity of a stoic, remained inflexible in the application

of absolute rules. He opposed everything, even schemes of the greatest

utility; and, standing in the way of all concession, rendered personal

animosities as hard to reconcile as political factions. He had separated

Pompey from the Senate by causing all his proposals to be rejected; he

had refused him his niece, notwithstanding the advantage for his party

of an alliance which would have impeded the designs of Cæsar.[1047]

Regardless of the political consequences of a system of extreme rigour,

he had caused Metellus to be deposed when he was tribune, and Cæsar when

he was prætor; he caused Clodius to be put upon his trial; he impeached

his judges, without any foresight of the fatal consequences of an

investigation which called in question the honour of an entire order.

This immoderate zeal had rendered the knights hostile to the Senate;

they became still more so by the opposition offered by Cato to the

reduction of the price of the farms of Asia.[1048] And thus Cicero,

seeing things in their true light, wrote as follows to Atticus: “With

the best intentions in the world, Cato is ruining us: he judges things

as if we were living in Plato’s Republic, while we are only the dregs of

Romulus.”[1049]

Nothing, then, arrested the march of events; the party of resistance

hurried them forward more rapidly than any other. It was evident that

they progressed towards a revolution; and a revolution is like a river,

which overflows and inundates. Cæsar aimed at digging a bed for it.

Pompey, seated proudly at the helm, thought he could command the waves

that were sweeping him along. Cicero, always irresolute, at one moment

allowed himself to drift with the stream, at another thought himself

able to stem it with a fragile bark. Cato, immovable as a rock,

flattered himself that alone he could resist the irresistible stream

that was carrying away the old order of Roman society.

CHAPTER IV.

(693-695.)

[Sidenote: Cæsar Proprætor in Spain (693).]

I. Whilst at Rome ancient reputations were sinking in struggles

destitute alike of greatness and patriotism, others, on the contrary,

were rising in the camps, through the lustre of military glory. Cæsar,

on quitting his prætorship, had gone to Ulterior Spain (_Hispania

Ulterior_), which had been assigned to him by lot. His creditors had

vainly attempted to retard his departure: he had had recourse to the

credit of Crassus, who had been his security for the sum of 830 talents

(nearly five millions of francs [£200,000]).[1050] He had not even

waited for the instructions of the Senate,[1051] which, indeed, could

not be ready for some time, as that body had deferred all affairs

concerning the consular provinces till after the trial of Clodius, which

was only terminated in April, 693.[1052] This eagerness to reach his

post could not therefore be caused by fear of fresh prosecutions, as has

been supposed; but its motive was the desire to carry assistance to the

allies, who were imploring the protection of the Romans against the

mountaineers of Lusitania. Always devoted without reserve to those whose

cause he espoused,[1053] he took with him into Spain his client

Masintha, a young African of high birth, whose cause he had recently

defended at Rome with extreme zeal, and whom he had concealed in his

house after his condemnation,[1054] to save him from the persecutions of

Juba, son of Hiempsal, king of Numidia.

It is related that, in crossing the Alps, Cæsar halted at a village, and

his officers asked him, jocularly, if he thought that even in that

remote place there were solicitations and rivalries for offices. He

answered, gravely, “I would rather be first among these savages than

second in Rome.”[1055] This anecdote, which is more or less authentic,

is repeated as a proof of Cæsar’s ambition. Who doubts his ambition? The

important point to know is whether it were legitimate or not, and if it

were to be exercised for the salvation or the ruin of the Roman world.

After all, is it not more honourable to admit frankly the feelings which

animate us, than to conceal, as Pompey did, the ardour of desire under

the mask of disdain?

On his arrival in Spain, he promptly raised ten new cohorts, which,

joined to the twenty others already in the country, furnished him with

three legions, a force sufficient for the speedy pacification of the

province.[1056] Its tranquillity was incessantly disturbed by the

depredations of the inhabitants of Mount Herminium,[1057] who ravaged

the plain. He required them to establish themselves there, but they

refused. Cæsar then began a rough mountain war, and succeeded in

reducing them to submission. Terrified by this example, and dreading a

similar fate, the neighbouring tribes conveyed their families and their

most precious effects across the River Durius (_Douro_). The Roman

general hastened to profit by the opportunity, penetrated into the

valley of the Mondego to take possession of the abandoned towns, and

went in pursuit of the fugitives. The latter, on the point of being

overtaken, turned, and resolved to accept battle, driving their flocks

and herds before them, in the hope that, through this stratagem, the

Romans would leave their ranks in their eagerness to secure the booty,

and so be more easily overcome. But Cæsar was not the man to be caught

in this clumsy trap; he left the cattle, went straight at the enemy, and

routed them. Whilst occupied in the campaign in the north of Lusitania,

he learnt that in his rear the inhabitants of Mount Herminium had

revolted again with the design of closing the road by which he had come.

He then took another; but they made a further attempt to intercept his

passage by occupying the country between the Serra Albardos[1058] and

the sea. Defeated, and their retreat cut off, they were forced to fly in

the direction of the ocean, and took refuge in an island now called

_Peniche de Cima_, which, being no longer entirely separated from the

continent, has become a peninsula. It is situated about twenty-five

leagues from Lisbon.[1059] As Cæsar had no ships, he ordered rafts to

be constructed, on which some troops crossed. The rest thought that

they might venture through some shallows, which, at low tide, formed a

ford; but, desperately attacked by the enemy, they were, as they

retreated, engulphed by the rising tide. Publius Scævius, their chief,

was the only man who escaped, and he, notwithstanding his wounds,

succeeded in reaching the mainland by swimming. Subsequently, Cæsar

obtained some ships from Cadiz, crossed over to the island with his

army, and defeated the barbarians. Thence he sailed in the direction of

Brigantium (now _La Corogne_), the inhabitants of which, terrified at

the sight of the vessels, which were strange to them, surrendered

voluntarily.[1060] The whole of Lusitania became tributary to Rome.

Cæsar received from his soldiers the title of _Imperator_. When the news

of his successes reached Rome, the Senate decreed in his honour a

holiday,[1061] and granted him the right of a triumph on his return. The

expedition ended, the conqueror of the Lusitanians took in hand the

civil administration, and caused justice and concord to reign in his

province. He merited the gratitude of the Spaniards by suppressing the

tribute imposed by Metellus Pius during the war against Sertorius.[1062]

Above all, he applied himself to putting an end to the differences that

arose each day between debtors and creditors, by ordaining that the

former should devote, every year, two-thirds of their income to the

liquidation of their debts; a measure which, according to Plutarch,

brought him great honour.[1063] This measure was, in fact, an act which

tended to the preservation of property; it prevented the Roman usurers

from taking possession of a debtor’s entire capital to reimburse

themselves; and we shall see that Cæsar made it of general application

when he became dictator.[1064] Finally, having healed their dissensions,

he loaded the inhabitants of Cadiz with benefits, and left behind him

laws, the happy influence of which was felt for a long period. He

abolished among the people of Lusitania their barbarous customs, some of

which went as far as the sacrifice of human victims.[1065] It was there

that he became intimate with a man of consideration in Cadiz, L.

Cornelius Balbus, who became _magister fabrorum_ (chief engineer) during

his Gaulish wars, and who was defended by Cicero when his right of

Roman citizen was called in question.[1066]

Though he administered his province with the greatest equity, yet,

during his campaign, he had amassed a rich booty, which enabled him to

reward his soldiers, and to pay considerable sums into the treasury

without being accused of peculation or of arbitrary acts. His conduct as

prætor of Spain[1067] was praised by all, and among others by Mark

Antony, in a speech pronounced after Cæsar’s death.

It was not then, as Suetonius pretends, by the begging of

subsidies[1068] (for a general hardly begs at the head of an army), nor

was it by an abuse of power, that he amassed such enormous riches; he

obtained them by contributions of war, by a good administration, and

even by the gratitude of those whom he had governed.

[Illustration: IV MAP OF THE PENINSULA OF PENICHE.]

[Sidenote: Cæsar demands a Triumph and the Consulship (694).]

II. Cæsar returned to Rome towards the month of June[1069] without

waiting for the arrival of his successor. This return, which the

historians describe as hasty, was by no means so, since his regular

authority had expired in the month of January, 694. But he was

determined to be present at the approaching meeting of the consular

comitia; he presented himself with confidence, and whilst preparing for

his triumph, demanded at the same time permission to become a candidate

for the consulship. Invested with the title of _Imperator_, having, by a

rapid conquest, extended the limits of the empire to the northern shores

of the Ocean, he might justly aspire to this double distinction; but it

was granted with difficulty. To obtain a triumph, it was necessary to

remain without the walls of Rome, to retain the lictors and continue the

military uniform, and to wait till the Senate should fix the date of

entry. To solicit for the consulship, it was necessary, on the contrary,

to be present in Rome, clad in a white robe,[1070] the costume of those

who were candidates for public offices, and to reside there several days

previous to the election. The Senate had not always considered these two

demands incompatible:[1071] it would perhaps even have granted this

indulgence to Cæsar, had not Cato, by speaking till the end of the day,

rendered all deliberation impossible.[1072] He had not, however, been so

severe in 684; but it was because, on that occasion, Pompey was

triumphing in reality over Sertorius, that foe to the aristocracy,

though officially it was only talked of as a victory over the

Spaniards.[1073] Constrained to choose between an idle pageant and real

power, Cæsar did not hesitate.

The ground had been well prepared for his election. His popularity had

been steadily on the increase; and the Senate, too much elated by its

successes, had estranged those who possessed the greatest influence.

Pompey, discontented at the uniform refusals with which his just demands

had been met, knew well also that the recent law, declaring enemies of

the State those who bribed the electors, was a direct attack against

himself, since he had openly paid for the election of the consul

Afranius; but, always infatuated with his own personal attractions, he

consoled himself for his checks by strutting about in his gaudy

embroidered robe.[1074] Crassus, who had long remained faithful to the

aristocratic party, had become its enemy, on account of the

ill-disguised jealousy of the nobles towards him, and their intrigues to

implicate him with Cæsar in the conspiracy of Catiline. However, though

he held in his hands the strings of many an intrigue, he was fearful of

compromising himself, and shrank from _declaring in public against any

man in credit_.[1075] Lucullus, weary of warfare and of intestine

struggles, was withdrawing from politics in order to enjoy his vast

wealth in tranquillity. Catulus was dead, and the majority of the nobles

were ready to follow the impulse given them by certain enthusiastic

senators who, caring little about public affairs, thought themselves the

happiest of men if they had _in their fishponds carp sufficiently tamed

to come and eat out of their hands_.[1076] Cicero felt his own solitary

position. The nobles, whose angry feelings he had served, now that the

peril was over, regarded him as no better than an upstart. Therefore he

prudently changed his principles; he, the exterminator of conspirators,

had become the defender of P. Sylla, one of Catiline’s accomplices, and

procured his acquittal in the teeth of the evidence;[1077] he, the

energetic opponent of all partitions of land, had spoken in favour of

the agrarian law of Flavius. He wrote to Atticus, “I have seen that

those men whose happiness belongs to the passing hour, those illustrious

lovers of fishponds, are no longer able to conceal their jealousy of me;

so I have sought more solid support.”[1078]

In a word, he had made overtures to Pompey, though in secret he admitted

that he possessed neither greatness of mind nor nobleness of heart. “He

only knows how to curry favour and flatter the people,” he said; “and

here am I bound to him on such terms that our interest, as individuals,

is served thereby; and, as statesmen, we can both act with greater

firmness. The ill-will of our ardent and unprincipled youth had been

excited against me. I have been so successful in bringing it round by my

address, that at present it cares for no one but me. Finally, I am

careful to wound no man’s feelings, and that without servileness or

popularity-hunting. My entire conduct is so well planned, that, as a

public man, I yield in nothing; and as a private individual, who knows

the weakness of honest men, the injustice of the envious, and the hatred

of the wicked, I take my precautions, and act with prudence.”[1079]

Cicero deceived himself with regard to the causes of his change of

party, and did not acknowledge to himself the reasons that constrained

him to look out for powerful patrons. Like all men destitute of force of

character, instead of openly confessing the motives of his conduct, he

justified himself to his friends by pretending that, so far from having

altered his own opinions, it was he who was converting Pompey, and would

soon make the same experiment upon Cæsar. “You rally me pleasantly,” he

wrote to Atticus, “on the subject of my intimacy with Pompey; but do not

fancy that I have contracted it out of regard for my personal safety. It

is all the effect of circumstances. When there was the slightest

disagreement between us, there was trouble in the State. I have laid my

plans and made my conditions, so that, without laying aside my own

principles, which are good, I have led him to better sentiments. He is

somewhat cured of his madness for popularity.... If I am equally

successful with Cæsar, whose ship is now sailing under full canvas,

shall I have done great harm to the State?”[1080] Cicero, like all men

whose strength lies in eloquence, felt that he could play no important

part, or even secure his own personal safety, unless he allied himself

with men of the sword.

Whilst at Rome the masters of the world were wasting their time in mean

quarrels, alarming news came suddenly to create a diversion in political

intrigue. Information was brought that the Gaulish allies on the banks

of the Saône had been defeated by the Germans, that the Helvetii were in

arms, and making raids beyond the frontiers. The terror was universal.

Fears were entertained of a fresh invasion of the Cimbri and Teutones;

and, as always happened on such occasions, a general levy, without

exception, was ordered.[1081] The consuls of the previous year drew lots

for their provinces, and it was decided to dispatch commissioners to

come to an understanding with the Gaulish tribes, with a view to resist

foreign invasions. The names of Pompey and Cicero were at once

pronounced; but the Senate, influenced by different motives, declared

that their presence was too necessary in Rome to allow them to be sent

away. They were unwilling to give the former an opportunity of again

distinguishing himself, or to deprive themselves of the concurrence of

the latter.

[Sidenote: Alliance of Cæsar, Pompey, and Crassus.]

III. News of a more re-assuring character having been received from

Gaul, the fear of war ceased for a time, and things had returned to

their customary course when Cæsar came home from Spain. In the midst of

conflicting opinions and interests, the presence of a man of steady

purpose and deeply-rooted convictions, and illustrious through recent

victories, was, without any doubt, an event. He did not require long to

form his estimate of the situation; and, as he could not as yet unite

the masses by the realisation of a grand idea, he thought to unite the

chiefs by a common interest.

All his endeavours from that time were devoted to making Pompey,

Crassus, and Cicero share his ideas. The first had been rather ill

disposed towards him. On his return from his campaign against

Mithridates, Pompey had called Cæsar his Egistheus,[1082] in allusion to

the intrigue which he had had with his wife Mutia, whilst he, like

Agamemnon, was making war in Asia. Resentment, on this account, usually

slight enough among the Romans, soon disappeared before the exigencies

of political life. As for Crassus, who had long been separated from

Pompey by a jealous feeling of rivalry, it needed all Cæsar’s tact, and

all the seduction of his manners, to induce him to become reconciled

with his rival. But, to bring them both to follow the same line of

conduct, it was necessary, over and above this, to tempt them with such

powerful motives as would ensure conviction. The historians, in general,

have given no other reason to account for the agreement of these three

men than personal interest. Doubtless, Pompey and Crassus were not

insensible to a combination that favoured their love of power and

wealth; but we ought to lend Cæsar a more elevated motive, and suppose

him inspired by a genuine patriotism.