 |
| Plato in Capitoline Museum- his example looms in the background of this summary |
727. De Provinciis Consularibus by Marcus Tullius Cicero.
Some letters relating to this speech:
Ad Quintum ii. 1. Before Dec 15, 57 BC. It is a report on a Senate meeting. There was a large attendance- some 200. A Tribune, Lycus, brought up the issue of the Campanian Land Law which had been passed by Caesar during his consulship of 59 BC. Remarks were made against Caesar, Gellius and there were complaints against Pompey who was not there. The Senate sat silently. Marcellinus observed that they felt that Pompey should be present for any discussion on this issue. Then the Tribune Racilius brought up coming trials. Marcellinus was asked to open the debate. Clodius’ activities were sharply condemned and a jury selection was proposed for dealing with his activities. Several members moved against Clodius including Racilius, Lentulus, Philippus, Vetus Antistius. The meeting was dismissed when Clodius and his pals caused a ruckus.
Ad Quintum ii. 5. end of March 56 BC. Lentulus is praised as an excellent Consul. He has been finding ways to block dangerous bills. Cicero has been busy in court.
Ad Quintum ii. 6 April 9, 56 BC. Cicero visited Pompey and had a very cordial meeting. There did not appear to be anything amiss. Pompey was on his way to Sardinia. (On the way he met Caesar at Luca where it was decided that Cicero had to be silenced. This was done through a message with Quintus.)
Ad Atticum iv.5. After June 20, 56 BC. Atticus questions why Cicero gave copy of his speech (this speech, probably- De Provinciis Consularibus) to Pompey and not him first for advice. Well, replied Cicero, it was Pompey who requested it. Cicero told Atticus that he was not proud of it but he did what must be done. Atticus wondered why Cicero not only supported the Triumvirate but also published a speech announcing it, so to speak. Cicero replied:
1. I must have political protection from my enemies.
2. Cicero claims that he has been moderate in his change of sides.
3. If this speech is well received by Caesar, he is sure that it will allow him (Cicero) room to maintain independence.
4. Some took delight when he opposed the Triumvirs but abandoned him when he needed them in a crisis.
Ad Atticum, iv.6. April 19, 55 BC. Cicero points out his difficult political position:
1. Labeled as insane if he says what he should about the Republic.
2. He looks like a slave, if he just chimes in with the Triumvirs
3. He is treated like a captive, if silent.
4. He can not retire, it is his code to enter the contest.
Ad Familiares 1.7 to Lentulus Spinther, June/July 56 BC. Lentulus wants to know how people feel toward him (Lentulus). Cicero- not easy to figure. Those Lentulus has offended while pursuing public interests are openly against. Those Lentulus has helped are less supportive now that they have what they wanted. Former Consuls are not in support. Pompey, after Lentulus wrote a letter is in good spirits toward Lentulus.
Lentulus hoped to restore Ptolemy to his throne in Egypt. Cicero recommends that he arrange his affairs in such a way that Ptolemy be restored. If successful, there will be praise, if not, jeers. Lentulus must be the judge of what to do.
Then to add more understanding, Cicero tells Lentulus that the manner in which he (Cicero) has been treated by those who should have found ways to bind him to common cause have been jealous and have alienated him (Cicero). Cicero has determined that it is not his birth which they resent but distinctions which they resist. Thus Lentulus’ problem and Cicero’s problem have this common ground. Cicero writes: Do not let the injustice of someone deter you from the excellence you have proposed for your life. But keep in mind your future in politics in Rome. Select with care those you can trust and those you should keep an eye on.
Then Cicero follows the above with the observation that the stupidity and lack of coherent plan (inconstantia) of Cato and friends has been out maneuvered by money, violence and shear force by appearing to possess greater legitimate authority.
The Triumvirate (Cicero , of course does not call it this- this is a modern term) has gained more than they expected as a result. Caesar has gained 10 Legates he requested and pay for his troops and a successor has been blocked. None of this is to my liking but it seems that neither calculation of our welfare must be considered by us without a sense of our moral goodness, nor must a calculation of our moral goodness be considered without a thought for our welfare.
Ad Familiares 1.9 to Lentulus Spinther, Rome, December, 54 BC.
Lentulus (presently governor in Cilicia) wrote to Cicero expressing surprise at his association with Caesar and Appius. Lentulus has no problem with that but does ask for an explanation of the defense Cicero has made for Vatinius whom Cicero previously had slashed to pieces in court.
Cicero feels that he must go back in time.
1. Because of Lentulus, Cicero realizes that he has been recalled from exile. For this Cicero owes Lentulus so much.
2. Cicero felt he owed his country to remain involved, since it had helped Lentulus restore Cicero. These sentiments, Cicero points out to Lentulus, were themes in Cicero’s speeches before the Senate.
3. Cicero notices that Lentulus did not have an easy path in the complete restoration of Cicero- there was ill will and meager support from those who should have been more vigorous.
4. The memorials in honor of the suppression of Catiline- those who should have helped did not and there was violence done to Cicero’s house and Quintus’.
5. Cicero had no easy time getting compensation for the destruction of his property. But owed the Senate a great deal for what they had done.
6. But Cicero had owed Pompey,too, for what he had done in the matter of his return but Cicero kept his political independence.
7. Pompey made a special trip to Rome to stand witness for Sestius whom Cicero was defending.
8. Vatinius said that Cicero was supportive of Caesar because Caesar was successful. (So this was a call for Cicero to display independence.)
9. So at the trial of Sestius Cicero said that while Pompey was present that Bibulus’ difficulties were better than a triumph. Cicero also said that the same people who kept Bibulus in his house, threw Cicero out of his. Cicero thoroughly attacked Vatinus, his career and Tribunate.
Cicero, later in the Senate meeting, concerning the Campanian Land Issue, was so forceful that April 5th both Consuls, Marcelinus and Philippus put Cicero’s proposal to the vote and it passed that the land issue should be discussed May 15.
By doing so Cicero showed
a. He was willing to strike at the heart of the Triumvirate
b. He was independent
10. Cicero’s speech affected Caesar and Pompey as he expected but others he did not anticipate.
11. Pompey gave no hint of displeasure. He left for Sardinia and Africa but met Caesar at Luca.
12. Cicero learned that Caesar AND Pompey were upset and Cicero claims that these were stirred up by Crassus.
13. But Cicero’s principal informant was Quintus to whom Pompey gave an ultimatum. Cicero was told not to discuss the land issue.
So at this point Cicero had a conversation with himself :
Should he not honor his brother’s pledge? But the real kicker was this- he learned that those things he had said which irritated Pompey, although in line with key Optimates (Senatorial leaders), pleased these that Pompey was annoyed and that Caesar would hate Cicero. Plus these hugged and chummed with Clodius.
Cicero continues- Pompey is a primary figure. Pompey and Cicero worked together in the past and Pompey helped to restore Cicero. So support of Pompey was not inconsistent on Cicero’s part. Caesar is close to Pompey. Thus Cicero supports Caesar.
But as Plato said the kind of leaders determine the character of citizens. Example- when the Senate voted to condemn Catiline, the power and authority of the Senate was evident. The same was true down to the Consulship of Bibulus and Caesar. But with Piso and Gabinius of 58 BC, Cicero was thrown under the bus, even though all of Italy come to Cicero’s defense. Cicero had an army but no generals. There were people ready to support but no one to lead.
Then Lentulus turned things around when he provided the leadership people needed to recall Cicero. Thus these who showed weak inclination to prevent his exile possessed courage for Cicero’s recall. Even Caesar and Pompey were inclined to support the Senate.
But Clodius was allowed to escape punishment and those who aided my restoration allowed Clodius to accommodate the memorial for ending the Catilinarian Conspiracy to his own purposes.
These hostile and jealous expected Cicero to return fro exile humbled and was expected to retire from politics. But these failed to see that Cicero was recalled with a universal cry. Cicero thus felt an obligation to participate.
Despite the irritation expressed by the jealous and hostile, Cicero only worked to help friends and the Republic.
Now Cicero sees it as hypocritical for those to criticize his support of Caesar, as they feel that I have abandoned my former ways. But the problem is- where are the good men?
So Cicero has been forced to reconsider. Plato comes to mind again- he said- push your country as far as you can but never use force. Plato did not see his people agreeable to persuasion and force was improper. But Cicero felt that he did not live in a country in a state of decline and as he was actively involved in politics, he hardly had the means to bail out. But he, as opposed to Plato, has a cause to pursue which is the unity of two men for the benefit of the Republic.
So Cicero supports Vatinius in part because he supports Caesar. Cicero reminds Lentulus that he has done the same kind of thing in the difficult world of politics.
Those who hug Clodius forced me to associate with Caesar and Pompey as a counter to their actions.
Now Cicero explains his connection with Crassus. Cicero and Crassus had a set to in a Senate meeting. Many said that they were glad that Cicero had come back to his old ways but then Cicero also heard that these were glad that Crassus would now be Cicero’s enemy. So when Pompey and Caesar asked Cicero to make up with Crassus, he did.
Cicero’s aim has not changed: to serve the Republic. But circumstances have caused him to alter the way he does things.
Cicero then cites Lentulus’ restraint and moderation as an example of the qualities Cicero admires: give and take, willingness to see and understand differences, willingness to see that there are many roads to do what is right, etc.
Cicero mentions a return to the Muses but in terms of publications in terms of ideas suitable to participate in politics.
Cicero gives frank advice concerning Appius and Lentulus’ dispute with him over a successor to his province and Cicero suggests that it is not worth it to oppose Appius but also says that he, Cicero, will support whatever decision he makes. (This is another example of the kind of give and take Cicero misses in others.)
Summary of the letters
The letters to Quintus make it clear that Cicero strove for a position which allowed him an independent voice. The letters to Atticus indicate that he felt that lack of support drove him into alliance with Caesar and a desire to find a way to benefit the state. In the first letter to Spinther Cicero makes the point that it is getting difficult to judge those who offer solid support and those who drift with the wind. He also points out that stupidity of the opposition (perhaps Cato and buddies) has severely blunted the their own efforts. Clearly in this first letter Cicero expresses the difficult task of adhering to one’s principles and yet being effective in politics for the benefit of the state. In the second letter to Spinther, Cicero makes the case that if he desires to bring benefit to the state he must in the present climate change tactics and allies. He is not happy about it but believes that Plato is right in that one should not do violence to one's country. Cicero also implies the importance of people like themselves to remain involved because they possess that happy balance of give and take and a willingness to work with others.
The Speech
No one should be surprised at the line that I take concerning what is to be done about governors for the four provinces of Syria (Gabinius), Macedonia (Piso), Transalpine Gaul and Cisalpine Gaul (Caesar) My resentment fits with the needs of the Republic concerning the assignment of Syria and Macedonia. Publius Servilius’ lead I follow whose motion makes clear that both should be disgraced. What else can I feel about those who exchanged my safety for their own benefit (both apparently made a deal wit Clodius to get plum provinces, if they let him do his will against Cicero).
I pass by the fact that they achieved their goal by condemning this Order, destroyed your prestige, deserted public oath, sacrificed the safety of the Roman people and harassed me and my family.
I will not mention the wrongs here in Rome. But let’s turn to the provinces.
Macedonia was fortified at one time by success of governors. It is now in chaos. The army is lost. Piso’s crimes have been paid by the destruction of our army. Once a small force brought security, now an army can not contain the chaos. Allies in the area are being bled dry. The manner in which he administers justice has made us hated. But for an honest legate, Byzantium would not have a single statue. You purchased the province by overturning the Republic.
His appearance belies his depraved nature.
What about Syria? Chaos and mayhem rules here. The Province has been run as a profitable business by Gabinius. He has made the work of tax collecting impossible. Gabinius has done nothing but find ways to destroy the tax gathers at the moment that our treasury is so low. Do not be fooled by Piso’s serious brow- for he has deprived Gabinius of the title of worst.
Both of these must not be recalled but dragged here.
There is a fascinating sentence:
Quo tempore si liberum vestrum iudicium fuisset nec totiens dilata res nec ad extremum e manibus erepta, restituissetis, id quod cupiebatis, vestrum auctoritatem iis, per quos erat emissa, revocatis et iis ipsis praemiis extortis quae erant pro scelere atque eversione patriae consecuti.
“At that time (during Clodius’ madness) if you had been free to make decisions and if so often the matter had not been put off and if the issue had not finally been snatched from your hands, you would have reclaimed, what you desired again and again, your moral authority when those have been recalled through whom your moral authority had been lost in the first place and when those prizes have been twisted out of the hands, prizes, which they had obtained through wickedness and subversion of the Republic.”
(This speech was referred to by Cicero as his palinode, a peace offering to Caesar and company. And in ways it is just that but sentences like this also indicate that he intends to keep whatever measure of independence he can. After all Piso was Caesar’s father in law and Gabinius was a close associate of Pompey. Admittedly Cicero, as his letters indicate was forced to take a different direction, if he wished to benefit the Republic. But the letters and this speech indicate that he not only bristled under the Triumvirs but struck out where and when he could.)
Gabinius has been refused a supplicate. How embarrassing. Piso sends no reports at all. But Gabinius can take comfort in that one other time a supplication was refused.
Assigning Syria and Macedonia to the Consuls of 55 BC I approve. But these will not govern until 54 BC. So I move that Praetors be assigned to these for 55 BC.
Even if these consuls were excellent, I will not recommend that Caesar be replaced.
(Apparently at this point the Consul Lucius Marcius Philippus interrupted Cicero and said that Caesar was the cause of Cicero’s exile. So why take this line?
Cicero responds: I am thinking of the needs of the state. Cicero then backs this up with examples from the past where people patched up differences for the sake of the state. E.G. Gracchus alone of the Tribunes of the time defended Lucius Scipio even though he was bitterly opposed to Lucius and Africanus. In public assembly he said that they had not suddenly become friends but that ill treatment of Lucius Scipio was not acceptable considering his services to the state. He cites the example of Marius who was given an extraordinary command in an unusual situation.
So Caesar’s work is not yet done. In spite of his success, much remains to be done. He must bring it to a conclusion. Though I am an enemy of Caesar I am a friend of the state.
(These examples testify to Cicero’s definition of a true statesman found in his De Re Publica.)
The interest of the state must trump personal feelings. My love of country brings me into a friendship with Caesar.
(Then Cicero uses current examples of odd couples in politics. These reveal a desire for give and take in terms of the state.)
Cicero states in full terms his reasons for opposing Clodius, even to his own peril. He did this while some looked to their own interests, while defending Cicero. They played it safe by catering to both sides.
I have disagreed with Caesar in the past as you have. Now I am in agreement with you as you have granted more supplications to Caesar than any general in history. You have changed your mind. I voted days of supplication for Pompey. Pompey supports those for Caesar even though they surpass his own.
We have granted ten legates to Caesar and pay for his troops. Now a cry is raised concerning my views in the assigning of these provinces.
It is not the charm of the province which holds Caesar there but a desire to complete the task. Disliking Caesar is no reason to recall him from his province. What Pompey did for other parts of the empire, let Caesar do in Gaul.
In the past we protected Italy and drove out the Gauls. Now Caesar realizes that security can only come when the whole is conquered.
One proposal assigns Syria and Transalpine Gaul to the next consuls. This validates the Lex Vatinia in that it leaves it in place in that Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum were assigned to Caesar in 59 BC. Another proposal assigns Cisalpine Gaul and Syria to the next consuls. But this would violate the Lex Vatinia because the consul would enter the province before Caesar’s term ended March 1, as the consul would enter the Province January 1.
Another proposal takes the war in Gaul into consideration even though that Senator disapproves of the Lex Vatinia. His proposal fixes a day for the successor at March 1. But this means that the Consul would have no province from January 1 through end of February.
All these proposals leave Piso in Macedonia.
These extraordinary honors voted to Caesar either were done because he deserves it or to bind him to this Senate. If someone starts a career a darling of the people, this does not mean that when they have rendered good service that a place should not be found for them in this most august body.
(Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus may be been the one to propose that an opportunity to make Cisalpine Gaul a consular province should not be missed in that a popular law, Lex Vatinia, passed under dubious or even illegal circumstance removed it from the prevue of the Senate. But Cicero politely suggests that it is unwise to miss an opportunity to bring Caesar into the fold. Cicero possessed immense respect for Marcellinus)
Cicero reminds the Senators: I was asked by Caesar to be a member of Board of Five (for his Land Law). Caesar asked me to be part of his political alliance (Triumvirate) and Caesar offered me a position as Legate. I refused all three. I went my own independent way, for I would not abandon my principles for safety.
Caesar transferred Clodius to the plebs which allowed him to run for Tribune. Either he did so because he was angry with me for the rejections or because he failed to win me over. But then he offered me a position on his staff. I declined. And I had no idea the danger which would come to the state and me with the next consuls.
Caesar has repeatedly displayed good will toward me.
If I did not want leading Senators to share in my difficulties (exile?) they should not want me to be a companion in their hostility toward Caesar. I can defend the acts of Caesar when in the past I did not attack or defend his policies when he was Consul.
By the advice of leading Senators I saved the state, by the advice of these same I did not join up with Caesar because they denied the legitimacy of those laws passed during Caesar’s tenure. YET they decried my exile but said that it was passed legally.
A leading Senator (Bibulus?) said that my exile was a disaster to the state but that it was done properly.
I have no ill will about what was said but I am going to use it to support my argument. For the laws of Caesar are declared invalid by many of these but conveniently ignore the same set of circumstances concerning my exile.
If Clodius’ laws are valid, even when circumstances declared his adoption illegal (to become a pleb), these people can not willy nilly choose to examine these laws with a fine tooth comb but give others just a quick look see, when both were carried under the same questionable circumstances. If I do have disagreements with Caesar, I must first look to the needs of the state and pick my fight with him some other time.
Levissime feram, si forte aut iis minus probaro, qui meum inimicum repugnante vestra auctoritate texerunt, aut iis, si qui meum cum inimico suo reditum in gratiam vituperabunt, cum ipsi et cum meo et cum suo inimico in gratiam non dubitarint redire.
But very lightly I will endure, if by chance either less to these I find approval, who concealed my enemy (Clodius) while your authority resisted, or to those if any will attack my reconciliation with their enemy (Caesar), when they themselves both with my and their own enemy (Clodius) do not hesitate to make reconciliation.
Signed,
The Obstinate Classicist
Signed,
The Obstinate Classicist
No comments:
Post a Comment