Cicero And The Fall Of The Roman Republic
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
With this warning Cicero left things to run their course in the city.
Outside, the armies of Metellus Celer in the valley of the Po and of Antonius in Etruria were hurriedly reinforced by fresh levies.
Meanwhile Catiline had fulfilled Cicero's predictions by joining the band of Manlius at Fæsulæ.
Disguise was no longer possible, and he assumed the dress and title of consul in open rebellion against the State.
The Senate replied by declaring Catiline and Manlius enemies, and summoning those who had followed them to disperse.
Rewards had already been offered for the denunciation of their confederates within the city.
Sallust tells us [29] that these decrees produced no effect.
None of the conspirators in the capital came forward to give evidence, and none of those in the field deserted their standard.
Catiline's force now amounted to ten thousand men.
He felt himself strong enough to refuse the aid of the runaway slaves who would gladly have flocked to him.
He feared that their presence might alarm those who looked with indifference or with favour on his movement, and so spoil his chance of support from the populace of the capital.
While the forces were thus mustering on either side, Cicero was annoyed by a foolish and ill-timed contest among his own followers.
At the recent consular election Silanus and Murena had headed the poll with Servius Sulpicius Rufus for third and Catiline for fourth.
A law had been lately passed increasing the penalties against bribery, and Cato, the sworn foe of electoral corruption, whose characteristic it was to be instant in season and out of season, must needs choose this moment, when all the fortunes of the commonwealth were at stake, to divide the friends of the constitution by trying to unseat Murena on a charge of bribery and treating.
Cicero protested against the folly of throwing the city again into the confusion of a contested election; he offered himself as counsel for Murena, and delivered on his behalf a speech [30] which is a very model of playful and persuasive eloquence, the more pleasant because it comes as an interlude in the grim tragedy of the Catilinarian orations.
The serious arguments of the consul as to the political necessities of the time are relieved by a sportive attack on the technical subtleties which form the stock in trade of the lawyer Sulpicius, and on the precisian doctrines which Cato has imbibed from his Stoic tutors.
"I must tell you, gentlemen, that those eminent qualities which we observe in Marcus Cato are all his own; what we sometimes find wanting in him is to be set down not to his nature but to his master, Zeno, whose doctrines have been caught up from learned tutors by our most talented friend, and that not as a topic for discussion, which is the usual way, but as a rule of life."
Cicero laughed the jurors into a good humour by a ludicrous application of Stoic maxims to the practical exigencies of Roman politics, and they unanimously acquitted Murena.
The additional peril which Cato's obstinate purism would have created was thus happily averted.
It is difficult to realise that this witty and sparkling speech was uttered by a man in hourly danger of his life, and with all the responsibilities of a tremendous political crisis weighing upon him.
"What a merry man we have for consul," was Cato's remark, as he listened from the accusers' bench.
It never seems to have occurred to Cato, that Cicero's merriment was pressed into the service of the State, and that his own austerity was helping on the projects of the very men whose execution he was himself to urge a few days later.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
CICERO AND THE CATILINE CONSPIRACY
Re: CICERO AND THE CATILINE CONSPIRACY
Cicero And The Fall Of The Roman Republic
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
The trial of Murena took place about the end of November.
Meanwhile the conspirators in the city anxiously awaited the appearance of Catiline and his army.
Their chief was Publius Cornelius Lentulus Sura, who had been consul in 71 B.C., and had been afterwards expelled from the Senate by the censors.
He had recovered his seat by being again elected to the prætorship, and was now serving that office.
He appears to have been a man of flighty and credulous temperament.
He lent his ears to designing soothsayers who persuaded him that a Sibylline oracle had foretold the domination in Rome of three Cornelii.
Part of the prophecy, they said, had been already fulfilled by Cinna and Sulla, and Lentulus was marked by fate to be the third.
Other senators and knights of good family, Autronius, Gabinius, Statilius, Cassius, and Cethegus were associated with him.
Cethegus was supposed to be the most energetic of the conspirators and always urged immediate and violent measures.
Cicero had failed as yet to get evidence of any overt act which would justify the arrest of these men, but at length their own folly gave him the desired opportunity.
There were present in Rome at this time some envoys from the Allobroges of Transalpine Gaul.
The Allobroges were overwhelmed with a burden of debt to Roman money-lenders and were ready for any desperate action.
In the meantime they had sent an embassy to Rome to beg some relief from the government.
These Gallic envoys were introduced to Gabinius by a certain freedman named Umbrenus, and Gabinius and the rest conceived the wild idea of associating the Allobroges in the conspiracy and inducing them to supply Catiline with cavalry for the invasion of Italy.
The Gauls at first listened with sympathy; but on further consideration they reflected that they might gain more by betraying their tempters to the government than by engaging seriously in so desperate a cause.
They accordingly took counsel with Fabius Sanga, the patron of their tribe, who at once gave notice to Cicero.
The Allobroges were instructed to continue their negotiations with the conspirators and to obtain from them if possible written documents.
With incredible stupidity Lentulus and his associates fell into the trap.
They gave the Gauls letters in their own handwriting, addressed to the senate and people of the Allobroges, undertaking to perform what they had promised verbally to the envoys, and urging the Allobroges in turn to send the assistance which their envoys had promised.
The Gauls were to visit Catiline on their way north, and they bore with them a letter from Lentulus to Catiline in which he advised him to admit the slaves into the ranks of his band.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
The trial of Murena took place about the end of November.
Meanwhile the conspirators in the city anxiously awaited the appearance of Catiline and his army.
Their chief was Publius Cornelius Lentulus Sura, who had been consul in 71 B.C., and had been afterwards expelled from the Senate by the censors.
He had recovered his seat by being again elected to the prætorship, and was now serving that office.
He appears to have been a man of flighty and credulous temperament.
He lent his ears to designing soothsayers who persuaded him that a Sibylline oracle had foretold the domination in Rome of three Cornelii.
Part of the prophecy, they said, had been already fulfilled by Cinna and Sulla, and Lentulus was marked by fate to be the third.
Other senators and knights of good family, Autronius, Gabinius, Statilius, Cassius, and Cethegus were associated with him.
Cethegus was supposed to be the most energetic of the conspirators and always urged immediate and violent measures.
Cicero had failed as yet to get evidence of any overt act which would justify the arrest of these men, but at length their own folly gave him the desired opportunity.
There were present in Rome at this time some envoys from the Allobroges of Transalpine Gaul.
The Allobroges were overwhelmed with a burden of debt to Roman money-lenders and were ready for any desperate action.
In the meantime they had sent an embassy to Rome to beg some relief from the government.
These Gallic envoys were introduced to Gabinius by a certain freedman named Umbrenus, and Gabinius and the rest conceived the wild idea of associating the Allobroges in the conspiracy and inducing them to supply Catiline with cavalry for the invasion of Italy.
The Gauls at first listened with sympathy; but on further consideration they reflected that they might gain more by betraying their tempters to the government than by engaging seriously in so desperate a cause.
They accordingly took counsel with Fabius Sanga, the patron of their tribe, who at once gave notice to Cicero.
The Allobroges were instructed to continue their negotiations with the conspirators and to obtain from them if possible written documents.
With incredible stupidity Lentulus and his associates fell into the trap.
They gave the Gauls letters in their own handwriting, addressed to the senate and people of the Allobroges, undertaking to perform what they had promised verbally to the envoys, and urging the Allobroges in turn to send the assistance which their envoys had promised.
The Gauls were to visit Catiline on their way north, and they bore with them a letter from Lentulus to Catiline in which he advised him to admit the slaves into the ranks of his band.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
Re: CICERO AND THE CATILINE CONSPIRACY
Cicero And The Fall Of The Roman Republic
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
By the evening of the 2d of December all was settled, and the Allobroges started on their homeward journey that night.
They were accompanied by Volturcius, one of the confederates, and attended by a considerable escort.
Cicero was duly informed of all this, and made his preparations accordingly. [31]
The great northern road from Rome crosses the Tiber at the Mulvian Bridge some two miles above the city.
Cicero set two of the prætors in ambush with armed bands in farm-houses on each side of the water.
These waited until the Allobroges and their companions were crossing in the darkness; then advancing simultaneously they occupied the two ends of the bridge.
Thus not only were the letters seized, but the whole party was caught on the bridge.
They were conveyed to Rome and deposited at the consul's house about daybreak (Dec. 3d).
Cicero forthwith summoned to his presence Gabinius, Cethegus, Statilius, and Lentulus.
Messages were likewise sent to some of the principal senators, who hurried to the consul's house.
Contrary to the advice of these, Cicero declined to open the letters.
He preferred at once to convoke the Senate, so that the evidence might come out in open court.
In the meantime, acting on a hint from the Allobroges, he sent one of the prætors to search the house of Cethegus, where a store of swords and daggers was soon found.
These were immediately seized.
As soon as the Senate had assembled, Cicero took Lentulus by the hand and led him into the House.
This show of gentle force exercised by the consul in person was considered due to the dignity of the prætor; the other conspirators, being but private men, were arrested with less ceremony.
Volturcius was first admitted to give evidence under promise of pardon, and detailed the instructions with which he was charged for Catiline, who was to be urged to advance as soon as possible on Rome, so as to be before the city during the festival of the Saturnalia; this would be the most convenient opportunity for his accomplices to co-operate with fire and sword within the city.
Next came the Allobroges with their evidence as to the messages and letters with which they had been entrusted, and as to the promises which Lentulus had made them on the strength of his Sibylline oracle.
When confronted on this point, Lentulus' assurance forsook him, and he did not venture to deny the charge.
But the most overwhelming evidence was that of the letters themselves which lay still unopened on the table.
The accused were called upon, one by one, and each acknowledged his own hand and seal before the thread was cut and the correspondence inciting to a Gallic invasion of Italy was read to the House. [32]
After this there could be no question as to the guilt of the prisoners: and to close the mouths of all objectors for the future Cicero directed that the evidence should be taken down word for word by certain trustworthy senators, and then immediately copied out and published.
The fidelity of the document was thus guaranteed by its being at once subjected to the criticism of those who had heard the evidence, and it was impossible to maintain with any plausibility that the record had been tampered with afterwards. [33]
TO BE CONTINUED ...
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
By the evening of the 2d of December all was settled, and the Allobroges started on their homeward journey that night.
They were accompanied by Volturcius, one of the confederates, and attended by a considerable escort.
Cicero was duly informed of all this, and made his preparations accordingly. [31]
The great northern road from Rome crosses the Tiber at the Mulvian Bridge some two miles above the city.
Cicero set two of the prætors in ambush with armed bands in farm-houses on each side of the water.
These waited until the Allobroges and their companions were crossing in the darkness; then advancing simultaneously they occupied the two ends of the bridge.
Thus not only were the letters seized, but the whole party was caught on the bridge.
They were conveyed to Rome and deposited at the consul's house about daybreak (Dec. 3d).
Cicero forthwith summoned to his presence Gabinius, Cethegus, Statilius, and Lentulus.
Messages were likewise sent to some of the principal senators, who hurried to the consul's house.
Contrary to the advice of these, Cicero declined to open the letters.
He preferred at once to convoke the Senate, so that the evidence might come out in open court.
In the meantime, acting on a hint from the Allobroges, he sent one of the prætors to search the house of Cethegus, where a store of swords and daggers was soon found.
These were immediately seized.
As soon as the Senate had assembled, Cicero took Lentulus by the hand and led him into the House.
This show of gentle force exercised by the consul in person was considered due to the dignity of the prætor; the other conspirators, being but private men, were arrested with less ceremony.
Volturcius was first admitted to give evidence under promise of pardon, and detailed the instructions with which he was charged for Catiline, who was to be urged to advance as soon as possible on Rome, so as to be before the city during the festival of the Saturnalia; this would be the most convenient opportunity for his accomplices to co-operate with fire and sword within the city.
Next came the Allobroges with their evidence as to the messages and letters with which they had been entrusted, and as to the promises which Lentulus had made them on the strength of his Sibylline oracle.
When confronted on this point, Lentulus' assurance forsook him, and he did not venture to deny the charge.
But the most overwhelming evidence was that of the letters themselves which lay still unopened on the table.
The accused were called upon, one by one, and each acknowledged his own hand and seal before the thread was cut and the correspondence inciting to a Gallic invasion of Italy was read to the House. [32]
After this there could be no question as to the guilt of the prisoners: and to close the mouths of all objectors for the future Cicero directed that the evidence should be taken down word for word by certain trustworthy senators, and then immediately copied out and published.
The fidelity of the document was thus guaranteed by its being at once subjected to the criticism of those who had heard the evidence, and it was impossible to maintain with any plausibility that the record had been tampered with afterwards. [33]
TO BE CONTINUED ...
Re: CICERO AND THE CATILINE CONSPIRACY
Cicero And The Fall Of The Roman Republic
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
The Senate next [34] resolved by an unanimous vote that Lentulus should be required to resign his magistracy, and that he should then be remanded with the rest to safe-keeping.
Cethegus, Statilius, and Gabinius were already secured, and orders for arrest were issued against five other ring-leaders, of whom however one only, Cœparius, was actually caught.
The prisoners were guarded in the houses of magistrates and senators, two of them being committed to the charge of Cæsar and Crassus.
By this choice of guardians the consul meant to indicate that he put no trust in the rumour which made Cæsar and Crassus accessories to the conspiracy, but regarded them as loyal and trustworthy citizens.
After thus providing for the custody of the prisoners, the Senate with equal unanimity passed a vote of thanks to Cicero because "by his courage, wisdom, and forethought the commonwealth had been delivered from the greatest dangers."
At the same time a solemn Thanksgiving was voted to the gods for having blessed the efforts of the consul "to rescue the city from conflagration, the citizens from massacre, and Italy from war."
Thanksgivings had often been decreed for the success of commanders in the field, but Cicero was the first to whom it had ever befallen to receive such a recognition of his services in the city.
Late in the afternoon of the same day (Dec. 3d) Cicero assembled the people and recounted to them the events of the last twenty-four hours.
This speech, the Third Catilinarian Oration, is our main authority for the incidents which have been already detailed.
The statements are fully confirmed not only by Plutarch but by Sallust, whose master, Cæsar, voted on this day in agreement with the rest of the Senate; we are justified in concluding from this unanimity that the facts were absolutely plain and notorious and that there were not two opinions as to the guilt of the accused.
Thus Cicero's first object was fully attained; the conspirators in the city, whose machinations had hitherto been hidden from the public, were now caught in a flagrant act rebellion, and an act which had conspicuously failed.
In presence of their egregious folly Cicero may well have exulted that Catiline was no longer at hand to be their guide, and it is not surprising that he should have been tempted to magnify the sagacity of the leader whom they had lost in comparison with the ineptitude of those who remained behind.
"Catiline," he exclaims, "would never have fixed for our information the season of the Saturnalia, or announced so long beforehand the day of doom and destruction for the commonwealth; he would never have been so simple as to allow me to lay hands on his own seal, his own letters, or the eye-witnesses of his guilt."
"When I drove him from the city, Romans, I had this in my mind that, Catiline once away, I had no reason to fear the sleepy Lentulus or the bloated Cassius or the raving maniac Cethegus." [35]
TO BE CONTINUED ...
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
The Senate next [34] resolved by an unanimous vote that Lentulus should be required to resign his magistracy, and that he should then be remanded with the rest to safe-keeping.
Cethegus, Statilius, and Gabinius were already secured, and orders for arrest were issued against five other ring-leaders, of whom however one only, Cœparius, was actually caught.
The prisoners were guarded in the houses of magistrates and senators, two of them being committed to the charge of Cæsar and Crassus.
By this choice of guardians the consul meant to indicate that he put no trust in the rumour which made Cæsar and Crassus accessories to the conspiracy, but regarded them as loyal and trustworthy citizens.
After thus providing for the custody of the prisoners, the Senate with equal unanimity passed a vote of thanks to Cicero because "by his courage, wisdom, and forethought the commonwealth had been delivered from the greatest dangers."
At the same time a solemn Thanksgiving was voted to the gods for having blessed the efforts of the consul "to rescue the city from conflagration, the citizens from massacre, and Italy from war."
Thanksgivings had often been decreed for the success of commanders in the field, but Cicero was the first to whom it had ever befallen to receive such a recognition of his services in the city.
Late in the afternoon of the same day (Dec. 3d) Cicero assembled the people and recounted to them the events of the last twenty-four hours.
This speech, the Third Catilinarian Oration, is our main authority for the incidents which have been already detailed.
The statements are fully confirmed not only by Plutarch but by Sallust, whose master, Cæsar, voted on this day in agreement with the rest of the Senate; we are justified in concluding from this unanimity that the facts were absolutely plain and notorious and that there were not two opinions as to the guilt of the accused.
Thus Cicero's first object was fully attained; the conspirators in the city, whose machinations had hitherto been hidden from the public, were now caught in a flagrant act rebellion, and an act which had conspicuously failed.
In presence of their egregious folly Cicero may well have exulted that Catiline was no longer at hand to be their guide, and it is not surprising that he should have been tempted to magnify the sagacity of the leader whom they had lost in comparison with the ineptitude of those who remained behind.
"Catiline," he exclaims, "would never have fixed for our information the season of the Saturnalia, or announced so long beforehand the day of doom and destruction for the commonwealth; he would never have been so simple as to allow me to lay hands on his own seal, his own letters, or the eye-witnesses of his guilt."
"When I drove him from the city, Romans, I had this in my mind that, Catiline once away, I had no reason to fear the sleepy Lentulus or the bloated Cassius or the raving maniac Cethegus." [35]
TO BE CONTINUED ...
Re: CICERO AND THE CATILINE CONSPIRACY
Cicero And The Fall Of The Roman Republic
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
The conflict was not yet over, but a first great success had been scored, and Cicero was fully justified in addressing his fellow-citizens in a tone of triumph and confidence; [36] "Night is now upon us; so do you, Romans, offer your thanks to that Jupiter who watches over the city and over you, and then return to your homes."
"Though the danger has been averted, yet I would have each one of you keep watch and ward over his own house this night as you did last night."
"That you shall not be called upon to do so much longer and that you shall enjoy quiet from this time forward, that shall be my care, Romans."
The multitude greeted his words with acclamation, and escorted him back in honour to the house of a friend with whom he was to lodge for the night.
The consul could not sleep that night in his own home, for it was in the possession of the Vestal Virgins, who each year celebrated in the house of one of the magistrates certain rites of the "Good Goddess" from which all males were rigorously excluded.
After the interval of one day (Dec. 4th), during which it appears that further evidence was being taken and rewards voted to the informers, [37] the Senate assembled for the third time on the 5th, the famous Nones of December, and the consul asked its advice on the question what was to be done with Lentulus and his fellows.
The place of meeting was the temple of Concord at the foot of the Capitoline Hill.
The Forum [38] was filled with citizens who had armed themselves at the consul's idding, and the slopes of the Capitol were occupied by bodies of Roman Knights, amongst whom Cicero's friend Atticus was conspicuous. [39]
TO BE CONTINUED ...
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
The conflict was not yet over, but a first great success had been scored, and Cicero was fully justified in addressing his fellow-citizens in a tone of triumph and confidence; [36] "Night is now upon us; so do you, Romans, offer your thanks to that Jupiter who watches over the city and over you, and then return to your homes."
"Though the danger has been averted, yet I would have each one of you keep watch and ward over his own house this night as you did last night."
"That you shall not be called upon to do so much longer and that you shall enjoy quiet from this time forward, that shall be my care, Romans."
The multitude greeted his words with acclamation, and escorted him back in honour to the house of a friend with whom he was to lodge for the night.
The consul could not sleep that night in his own home, for it was in the possession of the Vestal Virgins, who each year celebrated in the house of one of the magistrates certain rites of the "Good Goddess" from which all males were rigorously excluded.
After the interval of one day (Dec. 4th), during which it appears that further evidence was being taken and rewards voted to the informers, [37] the Senate assembled for the third time on the 5th, the famous Nones of December, and the consul asked its advice on the question what was to be done with Lentulus and his fellows.
The place of meeting was the temple of Concord at the foot of the Capitoline Hill.
The Forum [38] was filled with citizens who had armed themselves at the consul's idding, and the slopes of the Capitol were occupied by bodies of Roman Knights, amongst whom Cicero's friend Atticus was conspicuous. [39]
TO BE CONTINUED ...
Re: CICERO AND THE CATILINE CONSPIRACY
Cicero And The Fall Of The Roman Republic
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
The accounts which have been preserved to us of this great debate are strangely conflicting.
Plutarch [40] relates "that the only one of Cato's speeches surviving in his time was that delivered on this occasion; for Cicero the consul had trained certain writers of special intelligence to use signs which expressed the sense of many letters in a few short marks, and had set them here and there in the Senate-house."
"For the keeping and employment of what are called shorthand writers had not yet begun, but it is said that this occasion was the first when men struck on the track of any such invention."
It might have been hoped that this precaution would have secured us an authentic account of the speeches and motions before the House.
Nevertheless we find perplexing discrepancies.
Sallust omits Cicero's speech altogether, and Plutarch and Dio Cassius [41] give accounts of it which are in contradiction of each other, and neither of which agrees very well with the published version.
Brutus, who in later years wrote a life of his uncle Cato, went hopelessly astray, believing that Cato was the first to propose the punishment of death.
Luckily for us, this blunder caused Cicero to give us in a confidential letter [42] of criticism, addressed to Atticus, a plain statement of some of the facts, which is our best guide through the labyrinth of contradiction.
Lastly as to the nature of Cæsar's proposal, we have two distinct versions; the one, easy in itself but irreconcilable with what we know of the order of debate, is propounded by Appian [43] and Plutarch; the other, vouched for by Cicero in his published speech and by Sallust, fits in with the other facts as they are known to us but presents serious internal difficulties.
This is not the place for a full discussion of these vexed questions: I will only say that I believe that the contemporary authorities, Cicero and Sallust, have preserved the true account of the order of debate and of Cæsar's proposal, and that I shall follow them rather than Appian and Plutarch in the subsequent narrative.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
The accounts which have been preserved to us of this great debate are strangely conflicting.
Plutarch [40] relates "that the only one of Cato's speeches surviving in his time was that delivered on this occasion; for Cicero the consul had trained certain writers of special intelligence to use signs which expressed the sense of many letters in a few short marks, and had set them here and there in the Senate-house."
"For the keeping and employment of what are called shorthand writers had not yet begun, but it is said that this occasion was the first when men struck on the track of any such invention."
It might have been hoped that this precaution would have secured us an authentic account of the speeches and motions before the House.
Nevertheless we find perplexing discrepancies.
Sallust omits Cicero's speech altogether, and Plutarch and Dio Cassius [41] give accounts of it which are in contradiction of each other, and neither of which agrees very well with the published version.
Brutus, who in later years wrote a life of his uncle Cato, went hopelessly astray, believing that Cato was the first to propose the punishment of death.
Luckily for us, this blunder caused Cicero to give us in a confidential letter [42] of criticism, addressed to Atticus, a plain statement of some of the facts, which is our best guide through the labyrinth of contradiction.
Lastly as to the nature of Cæsar's proposal, we have two distinct versions; the one, easy in itself but irreconcilable with what we know of the order of debate, is propounded by Appian [43] and Plutarch; the other, vouched for by Cicero in his published speech and by Sallust, fits in with the other facts as they are known to us but presents serious internal difficulties.
This is not the place for a full discussion of these vexed questions: I will only say that I believe that the contemporary authorities, Cicero and Sallust, have preserved the true account of the order of debate and of Cæsar's proposal, and that I shall follow them rather than Appian and Plutarch in the subsequent narrative.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
Re: CICERO AND THE CATILINE CONSPIRACY
Cicero And The Fall Of The Roman Republic
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
Cicero first put the question to Silanus, the consul elect, who thereupon moved that the five prisoners should be put to death.
He was followed by the other senators of consular rank, who all supported the motion.
The prætorian benches were next to be consulted.
Among the first in this rank came Cæsar, who was praetor-elect and would enter on office at the end of the month.
Cæsar, if we may trust Sallust's version of his speech, while fully agreeing as to the guilt of the accused and acknowledging that no punishment could be too severe for their crimes, urged that the Senate should nevertheless consider not the deserts of the prisoners but its own character as the guardian of the laws and the constitution.
He pointed out with much force that it is just by cases like this that bad precedents are set up and the habit of obedience to the law broken through; it was thus that the Thirty at Athens had begun their tyranny by putting to death without trial men of notoriously criminal character.
To let the prisoners go would be manifestly impolitic, but without breaking the law which forbade that any Roman citizen should be punished with death except by command of the People, measures might be taken which would render the conspirators powerless to do harm for the future.
He therefore proposed that the property of the culprits should be confiscated, and that they should be confined in chains in corporate towns of Italy, and that it should be declared illegal for anyone to bring before the Senate or the People any proposal for their release.
It is obviously very difficult to understand how such a proposal could follow on such an argument.
Cæsar by proposing an alternative sentence seems to acknowledge the right of the Senate to try these men and to condemn them to punishment of some sort.
Why was the Senate better qualified to pronounce a sentence of imprisonment for life, than a sentence of death?
This question, though it seems to force itself on the notice of the reader, is never clearly stated, much less solved, by any of our authorities.
Appian evades it by making Cæsar propose a mere remand of the prisoners for a legal trial later on.
Sallust and Cicero give us little help in explanation, though they state the facts correctly.
The most probable answer seems to be that imprisonment in the days of the Roman Republic was not fully recognised as a species of punishment, but only as a harsh method of safe-keeping.
For this reason it was not mentioned amongst the punishments against which a right of appeal was guaranteed to Roman citizens.
All the laws which treat of the right of appeal speak of death, of scourging and of fine, as the penalties which are appealed against.
The Senate then, or rather the consul acting under the advice of the Senate, is justified (so we must suppose Cæsar to maintain) in punishing dangerous enemies of the State so long as the punishment inflicted is not one forbidden totidem verbis by the statute.
Thus Cæsar's motion may be [45] held to "keep on the windy side of the law," though it seems a strange subtlety to say that a court, not qualified to pronounce any "capital" sentence (which in this age commonly meant a sentence of death to be avoided by voluntary exile and self-deprivation of citizenship), should nevertheless have the right to inflict a punishment infinitely more severe.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
Cicero first put the question to Silanus, the consul elect, who thereupon moved that the five prisoners should be put to death.
He was followed by the other senators of consular rank, who all supported the motion.
The prætorian benches were next to be consulted.
Among the first in this rank came Cæsar, who was praetor-elect and would enter on office at the end of the month.
Cæsar, if we may trust Sallust's version of his speech, while fully agreeing as to the guilt of the accused and acknowledging that no punishment could be too severe for their crimes, urged that the Senate should nevertheless consider not the deserts of the prisoners but its own character as the guardian of the laws and the constitution.
He pointed out with much force that it is just by cases like this that bad precedents are set up and the habit of obedience to the law broken through; it was thus that the Thirty at Athens had begun their tyranny by putting to death without trial men of notoriously criminal character.
To let the prisoners go would be manifestly impolitic, but without breaking the law which forbade that any Roman citizen should be punished with death except by command of the People, measures might be taken which would render the conspirators powerless to do harm for the future.
He therefore proposed that the property of the culprits should be confiscated, and that they should be confined in chains in corporate towns of Italy, and that it should be declared illegal for anyone to bring before the Senate or the People any proposal for their release.
It is obviously very difficult to understand how such a proposal could follow on such an argument.
Cæsar by proposing an alternative sentence seems to acknowledge the right of the Senate to try these men and to condemn them to punishment of some sort.
Why was the Senate better qualified to pronounce a sentence of imprisonment for life, than a sentence of death?
This question, though it seems to force itself on the notice of the reader, is never clearly stated, much less solved, by any of our authorities.
Appian evades it by making Cæsar propose a mere remand of the prisoners for a legal trial later on.
Sallust and Cicero give us little help in explanation, though they state the facts correctly.
The most probable answer seems to be that imprisonment in the days of the Roman Republic was not fully recognised as a species of punishment, but only as a harsh method of safe-keeping.
For this reason it was not mentioned amongst the punishments against which a right of appeal was guaranteed to Roman citizens.
All the laws which treat of the right of appeal speak of death, of scourging and of fine, as the penalties which are appealed against.
The Senate then, or rather the consul acting under the advice of the Senate, is justified (so we must suppose Cæsar to maintain) in punishing dangerous enemies of the State so long as the punishment inflicted is not one forbidden totidem verbis by the statute.
Thus Cæsar's motion may be [45] held to "keep on the windy side of the law," though it seems a strange subtlety to say that a court, not qualified to pronounce any "capital" sentence (which in this age commonly meant a sentence of death to be avoided by voluntary exile and self-deprivation of citizenship), should nevertheless have the right to inflict a punishment infinitely more severe.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
Re: CICERO AND THE CATILINE CONSPIRACY
Cicero And The Fall Of The Roman Republic
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
Whatever the reasonableness of Cæsar's proposal, his speech produced a strong effect, and many of the senators of prætorian rank signified their assent.
Silanus the consul-elect took alarm, and explained away his own motion by an unworthy quibble.
It was worded in the terms "that the extreme penalty be inflicted on the prisoners," and he now interpreted this to mean the same as Cæsar's proposal; "for perpetual imprisonment," he said "is the extreme penalty which can be inflicted on a Roman citizen." [46]
Many of Cicero's friends approved of Cæsar's motion, as it would undoubtedly relieve the consul from the risk and responsibility which he would incur by the actual infliction of death. [47]
His brother Quintus is said to have been among those who wavered. [48]
At this point Cicero intervened in the debate with the speech which he afterwards published as the Fourth Catilinarian Oration.
As consul, he was not like the rest called upon to deliver his opinion in the order of his place, but might interpose with a magisterial statement at any moment which he deemed expedient.
In another respect the consul differs from the ordinary senator.
He is present to ask and receive the advice of the Senate, not to give advice himself.
He must therefore refrain, much as an English judge charging a jury refrains, from expressing his adhesion to one side or the other, though by his method of summing up and laying the question before the House he may indicate pretty clearly what is his own opinion.
In this speech Cicero insists on two points: first he wishes that the Senate shall decide according to what it deems good for the State without regard to what may be the personal consequences to himself; these he is ready and proud to accept: secondly he protests against any delay.
"Now whatever is to be done, whichever way your minds and your resolutions incline, you must decide before nightfall."
"You see what a crime has been brought before your bar."
"If you suppose that only a few are associated in it, you are much mistaken; this mischief has spread further than we thought; it has not only infected Italy, but it has crossed the Alps, and working its way in darkness has already laid hold on several provinces."
"It cannot be crushed out by withholding your hand and putting off the day of reckoning."
"Whatever the nature of the punishment which you select, you must inflict it instantly." [49]
TO BE CONTINUED ...
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
Whatever the reasonableness of Cæsar's proposal, his speech produced a strong effect, and many of the senators of prætorian rank signified their assent.
Silanus the consul-elect took alarm, and explained away his own motion by an unworthy quibble.
It was worded in the terms "that the extreme penalty be inflicted on the prisoners," and he now interpreted this to mean the same as Cæsar's proposal; "for perpetual imprisonment," he said "is the extreme penalty which can be inflicted on a Roman citizen." [46]
Many of Cicero's friends approved of Cæsar's motion, as it would undoubtedly relieve the consul from the risk and responsibility which he would incur by the actual infliction of death. [47]
His brother Quintus is said to have been among those who wavered. [48]
At this point Cicero intervened in the debate with the speech which he afterwards published as the Fourth Catilinarian Oration.
As consul, he was not like the rest called upon to deliver his opinion in the order of his place, but might interpose with a magisterial statement at any moment which he deemed expedient.
In another respect the consul differs from the ordinary senator.
He is present to ask and receive the advice of the Senate, not to give advice himself.
He must therefore refrain, much as an English judge charging a jury refrains, from expressing his adhesion to one side or the other, though by his method of summing up and laying the question before the House he may indicate pretty clearly what is his own opinion.
In this speech Cicero insists on two points: first he wishes that the Senate shall decide according to what it deems good for the State without regard to what may be the personal consequences to himself; these he is ready and proud to accept: secondly he protests against any delay.
"Now whatever is to be done, whichever way your minds and your resolutions incline, you must decide before nightfall."
"You see what a crime has been brought before your bar."
"If you suppose that only a few are associated in it, you are much mistaken; this mischief has spread further than we thought; it has not only infected Italy, but it has crossed the Alps, and working its way in darkness has already laid hold on several provinces."
"It cannot be crushed out by withholding your hand and putting off the day of reckoning."
"Whatever the nature of the punishment which you select, you must inflict it instantly." [49]
TO BE CONTINUED ...
Re: CICERO AND THE CATILINE CONSPIRACY
Cicero And The Fall Of The Roman Republic
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
He next proceeds to explain to the senators the alternatives presented to them — "I see that there are two motions before the House, the first that of Decimus Silanus, who proposes that those who have attempted to destroy this commonwealth shall be punished by death, the other that of Caius Cæsar who, while exempting them from death, provides for every other punishment in its most aggravated form."
"Both these senators have pronounced sentences stern as their own dignity and the gravity of the crisis demand."
"The one thinks that men who have attempted to slaughter the Roman people, to destroy our Empire, to blot out the name of Rome, ought not to be allowed to enjoy a moment longer the life and breath which we all draw in common; and he bears in mind that this punishment has often been inflicted on wicked citizens in this commonwealth."
"The other perceives that death has not been established by Heaven as a punishment, but that it is either a debt due to nature, or a haven of rest from toils and troubles; and so wise men never meet it with reluctance, and brave men often seek it of their own will."
"But chains, and chains to be worn for ever, are truly a device framed for the exemplary punishment of heinous crimes."
"He adds a heavy penalty on the townships in which they are to be confined, if any of the prisoners escapes from his bonds; he commits them to a dreadful prison, and provides as the crimes of these wretches deserve, that no one shall be allowed to propose to alleviate by decree of Senate or People the penalty to which he condemns them, thus depriving them even of hope, so often the sole consolation of men in trouble: he orders further that their property be confiscated."
"All that he leaves to these criminals is life, and if he had taken this too, by a single pang he would have relieved them from all the pangs of mind and body and all the expiation of their crime."
"And for this it was that the men of old, in order to see before the eyes of the wicked some terror in their lifetime, thought it well to teach that pains and penalties not unlike this are reserved for the impious in the world below; they understood, it is clear, that if these were set aside death in itself was nothing to fear."
"Now, Senators, I see what course is for my own benefit."
"If you accept the proposal of Caius Cæsar, it is probable, since he has professed those politics which are supposed to be in favour with the many, that having him for the adviser and the voucher for this sentence I shall have less to fear from the attacks of the multitude; if the other proposal be adopted, I do not know but that more of trouble may be in store for me."
"But let all considerations of my danger give way to the interests of the State."
"For Cæsar, as his own dignity and the splendour of his ancestry required, has laid this sentence in our hands, as a pledge of his enduring loyalty to the State."
"The truth is, that Caius Cæsar knows that the Sempronian Law is intended for the benefit of Roman citizens, and that the man who is an enemy to the State cannot by any possibility be a citizen; he knows likewise that the very man [50] who carried the Sempronian Law paid the penalty of his treason without the command of the People. . . ."
"And so a man of his known kindliness and clemency does not hesitate to commit Publius Lentulus to a life-long dungeon and chains; he provides that for the future no man shall be permitted to gain credit for himself by alleviating the punishment of Lentulus, or to pose as the people's friend, while bringing calamity on the Roman People; he adds that his goods are to be confiscated, so that to all the other torments of mind and body want and beggary are to be added."
"Therefore, whether you vote with him, you will have given me a coadjutor beloved and acceptable to the commons, to help me to plead my cause to the multitude; or whether you prefer to follow the advice of Silanus, you will have an easy defence both for yourselves and me against any charge of cruelty, and I will maintain that this sentence was far the less severe of the two."
TO BE CONTINUED ...
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
He next proceeds to explain to the senators the alternatives presented to them — "I see that there are two motions before the House, the first that of Decimus Silanus, who proposes that those who have attempted to destroy this commonwealth shall be punished by death, the other that of Caius Cæsar who, while exempting them from death, provides for every other punishment in its most aggravated form."
"Both these senators have pronounced sentences stern as their own dignity and the gravity of the crisis demand."
"The one thinks that men who have attempted to slaughter the Roman people, to destroy our Empire, to blot out the name of Rome, ought not to be allowed to enjoy a moment longer the life and breath which we all draw in common; and he bears in mind that this punishment has often been inflicted on wicked citizens in this commonwealth."
"The other perceives that death has not been established by Heaven as a punishment, but that it is either a debt due to nature, or a haven of rest from toils and troubles; and so wise men never meet it with reluctance, and brave men often seek it of their own will."
"But chains, and chains to be worn for ever, are truly a device framed for the exemplary punishment of heinous crimes."
"He adds a heavy penalty on the townships in which they are to be confined, if any of the prisoners escapes from his bonds; he commits them to a dreadful prison, and provides as the crimes of these wretches deserve, that no one shall be allowed to propose to alleviate by decree of Senate or People the penalty to which he condemns them, thus depriving them even of hope, so often the sole consolation of men in trouble: he orders further that their property be confiscated."
"All that he leaves to these criminals is life, and if he had taken this too, by a single pang he would have relieved them from all the pangs of mind and body and all the expiation of their crime."
"And for this it was that the men of old, in order to see before the eyes of the wicked some terror in their lifetime, thought it well to teach that pains and penalties not unlike this are reserved for the impious in the world below; they understood, it is clear, that if these were set aside death in itself was nothing to fear."
"Now, Senators, I see what course is for my own benefit."
"If you accept the proposal of Caius Cæsar, it is probable, since he has professed those politics which are supposed to be in favour with the many, that having him for the adviser and the voucher for this sentence I shall have less to fear from the attacks of the multitude; if the other proposal be adopted, I do not know but that more of trouble may be in store for me."
"But let all considerations of my danger give way to the interests of the State."
"For Cæsar, as his own dignity and the splendour of his ancestry required, has laid this sentence in our hands, as a pledge of his enduring loyalty to the State."
"The truth is, that Caius Cæsar knows that the Sempronian Law is intended for the benefit of Roman citizens, and that the man who is an enemy to the State cannot by any possibility be a citizen; he knows likewise that the very man [50] who carried the Sempronian Law paid the penalty of his treason without the command of the People. . . ."
"And so a man of his known kindliness and clemency does not hesitate to commit Publius Lentulus to a life-long dungeon and chains; he provides that for the future no man shall be permitted to gain credit for himself by alleviating the punishment of Lentulus, or to pose as the people's friend, while bringing calamity on the Roman People; he adds that his goods are to be confiscated, so that to all the other torments of mind and body want and beggary are to be added."
"Therefore, whether you vote with him, you will have given me a coadjutor beloved and acceptable to the commons, to help me to plead my cause to the multitude; or whether you prefer to follow the advice of Silanus, you will have an easy defence both for yourselves and me against any charge of cruelty, and I will maintain that this sentence was far the less severe of the two."
TO BE CONTINUED ...
Re: CICERO AND THE CATILINE CONSPIRACY
Cicero And The Fall Of The Roman Republic
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
The next feature in the debate was the speech of Cato.
He was tribune-elect, and would probably be asked for his opinion immediately after the senators of praetorian rank.
Plutarch [51] tells us that Cato severely rebuked his brother-in-law Silanus for his weakness, and fiercely attacked Cæsar for trying to intimidate the Senate, when he might be thankful if he himself escaped condemnation as an accomplice.
Sallust's version of Cato's speech contains nothing about Silanus, and softens down the invective against Cæsar.
But the main argument, as Sallust gives it, is so perfectly adapted to the situation, that there can be little doubt that it is the one which Cato actually used.
This argument is that the situation calls for administrative action rather than for precise weighing of penalties. [52]
The prisoners are avowedly guilty, so that no injustice can be done; but the really vital question is what effect will the one or the other decision of the House have on the chances of Catiline and his army. [53]
When the question was brought to this point, a sensible man could hardly doubt what answer it was his duty to give.
Cæsar's proposal was obviously and notoriously impracticable.
What probability was there of such a sentence being carried out?
How could the Senate prevent any magistrate from proposing the release of the prisoners?
Cicero had later on the opportunity of proving in his own person the futility of such restrictive clauses.
Clodius in the law which banished him provided that it should be unlawful to propose his recall, but this did not prevent its being both proposed and carried.
The same would doubtless have been the case in this instance if Cæsar's motion had been adopted.
An agitation would at once have been set on foot to review the sentence.
Meanwhile Catiline and his companions in arms would have had no sense of discouragement or terror at the fate of their fellows.
They would have regarded Lentulus as simply out of the game for the moment, until they could come and rescue him.
His fate would have depended mainly on the issue of the military operations in the field, whereas, as we shall see presently, his mediate execution had a momentous effect on the decision of that issue.
TO BE CONTINUED ...
by James Leigh Strachan-Davidson
CHAPTER V.
CICERO AND CATILINE. 63 B.C., continued ...
The next feature in the debate was the speech of Cato.
He was tribune-elect, and would probably be asked for his opinion immediately after the senators of praetorian rank.
Plutarch [51] tells us that Cato severely rebuked his brother-in-law Silanus for his weakness, and fiercely attacked Cæsar for trying to intimidate the Senate, when he might be thankful if he himself escaped condemnation as an accomplice.
Sallust's version of Cato's speech contains nothing about Silanus, and softens down the invective against Cæsar.
But the main argument, as Sallust gives it, is so perfectly adapted to the situation, that there can be little doubt that it is the one which Cato actually used.
This argument is that the situation calls for administrative action rather than for precise weighing of penalties. [52]
The prisoners are avowedly guilty, so that no injustice can be done; but the really vital question is what effect will the one or the other decision of the House have on the chances of Catiline and his army. [53]
When the question was brought to this point, a sensible man could hardly doubt what answer it was his duty to give.
Cæsar's proposal was obviously and notoriously impracticable.
What probability was there of such a sentence being carried out?
How could the Senate prevent any magistrate from proposing the release of the prisoners?
Cicero had later on the opportunity of proving in his own person the futility of such restrictive clauses.
Clodius in the law which banished him provided that it should be unlawful to propose his recall, but this did not prevent its being both proposed and carried.
The same would doubtless have been the case in this instance if Cæsar's motion had been adopted.
An agitation would at once have been set on foot to review the sentence.
Meanwhile Catiline and his companions in arms would have had no sense of discouragement or terror at the fate of their fellows.
They would have regarded Lentulus as simply out of the game for the moment, until they could come and rescue him.
His fate would have depended mainly on the issue of the military operations in the field, whereas, as we shall see presently, his mediate execution had a momentous effect on the decision of that issue.
TO BE CONTINUED ...