734. Cicero and the End of the Roman Republic by W. K. Lacey

734.  Cicero and the End of the Roman Republic by W. K. Lacey.  This book is an ideal introduction to the life of Cicero.  This is not meant to minimize its value as a quality biography.  Lacey has incorporated difficult material covering a wide range of Cicero’s interests and activities without bogging one down in details that tend sometimes to obscure the objective.

Cicero’s qualities are evident when he was Quaestor in Lilybaeum, Sicily.  His activities there indicate a man who is conscientious, just and approachable.  He was a humane person.  When back in Rome after his Quaestorship in Lilybaeum, Cicero continued to build up support by kind acts, court cases and a clear willingness to work very hard.

Delacroix- Cicero attacking Verres

Lacey relates a neat story Cicero told about himself upon returning from Sicily.  Cicero expected that his fine work there would be the talk of Rome but when he arrived at a town loaded with vacationers from Rome, he quickly learned that no one had any idea where he had been or what he had done.  The story presents a nice contrast to those assertions that he was vain and self-centered.  Also while in Sicily, he took the time to find the tomb of Archimedes.  Sicilians had no idea where it was.  One story lets us know that he could laugh at himself, the other that he had a wide range of interests.

When he became Consul in 63 B.C., Tribune Rullus proposed a land bill which would set up a powerful commission to administer the law, it would also interfere with Pompey’s settlements he had arranged in the east when commander there.  This plan was hatched by what Cicero referred to as the pauci.  That is a secret group who met in private to work out a deal to avoid debate in a Senate meeting and face the inevitable thrust and parry.  Cicero disliked any move which avoided the use of debate to settle an issue.

Once during his Consulship, Roscius Otho, then a Praetor, was booed as he entered the theater to watch a performance.  The reason for this was that as Tribune he carried a measure which gave special seats to the Equites.  Cicero who was there called the audience to the temple of Bellona nearby, gave a speech, after which, the audience returned and greeted Roscius with applause.

Later there was the trial of Rabirius.  Rabirius was accused of killing the Tribune Saturninus in 100 B.C.  So in 63 B.C. Labienus, perhaps at the urging of Caesar, brought Rabirius to trial for treason.  The trial was not brought to completion.  So what was the point?  After all the murder took place nearly forty years previous.  It seems that the trial was meant to bring the right of the Senate to pass Senatus Consultum Ultimum (Senate’s Last Decree) into question.  The SCU had been used in the past to deal with emergencies.  This case was questioning the right of the Senate to do so.

This trial and the election of Caesar to the position of Pontifex Maximus caused the conservative members of the Senate to lend more and more support to Cicero.  Good timing, because as the summer wore on there was more and more concern that some kind of conspiracy was afoot.  Elections were held.  One of the Consul-elects was Murena.  

As summer became fall, the conspiracy, led by Catiline became more and more of a reality.  Cicero brought up in the Senate the fact that there was a conspiracy.  But he did not receive the support he needed.  

November 1, there was an attempt to seize a city near Rome.  Other activities were reported.  The Senate passed the SCU.  November 7, an attempt was made on Cicero’s life at his own home.  Cicero was informed that Catiline had left Rome.  This took a load off.  At least the leader of the conspiracy was not in the city itself.  The next day, November 8, Cicero enters the Senate and to his surprise, there sits Catiline.  On the spot Cicero delivers what is now called the Ist Catilinarian.  His hope was to get Catiline to make his move.  He did, left Rome and helped to strengthen Cicero's case.

But Cicero had more problems than convincing the Senate of the reality of conspiracy, he also had to face a court case.  In this trial Marcus Cato and Servius Sulpicius Rufus indicted Murena for corruption.  Cicero took the case, used humor and argument to convince the jury that it was dangerous to have the year begin without two consuls in office.  Murena was also a military leader whose services, Cicero realized, would soon be needed.  He won the case.

Cicero knew that there was indeed a conspiracy but had not a shred of proof.  This the conspirators supplied by asking the Gauls to revolt.  This would keep the Roman army busy while the conspirators carried out their plan.  The Gauls decided to report this to Roman authorities.  Cicero convinced the Gauls to play along and insist on signed documents to present to their people.  All of these were arrested as they crossed the Mulvian Bridge (which still stands).  Now Cicero had his proof.

I highly recommend reading Cicero’s speeches, as these give all the details.  There is also the added benefit that Cicero presents a remarkable and exciting narrative.

The conspirators were placed in holding cells under guard.  Even then there was the attempt of a jail break.  

December 5 there was a debate which lasted for three days as to what to do with the conspirators caught in Rome.  Several proposals were made: life in prison, confiscation of property, death.

In the end the Senate voted to execute the prisoners.  All of these were of course Roman citizens.  So the dilemma was difficult- eliminate an immediate threat? or risk a jail break? or risk breaking Roman law?  According to Roman law only a trail of citizens could bring a death sentences.  But is someone still a citizen who  has been proven to conspire to destroy the state?  The argument is still going on.

When Cicero approached the Rostra to give his farewell address (December 31, 63 B.C.), he was prevented by the Tribune Metellus Nepos who said that no one who had put Roman citizens to death had the right to address the people and swear an oath that he had carried out the laws of the Republic.  However, when Cicero raised his voice and said simply “I have saved the state”, there was huge applause.  

Cicero had hoped to work with Pompey upon his return from the east, as commander there.  In this he was somewhat successful but as Pompey could not get the settlement he desired for his troops and other measures, it is this that Lacey feels drove Pompey into the camp of Caesar.  In addition Cato and allies had no intention of giving an inch to Pompey or Caesar for that matter.  This helped to push Caesar to end up using the methods he did.  He had little sympathy for traditional practice anyway.

Cicero is often accused of being subject to sudden and unpredictable changes of mood (mercurial).  Lacey covers this but in a way which admits that he was respected in the Senate and by the people.  Lacey does not seem sure that this explains the whole man and his decisions in politics.

So what is called the First Triumvirate came about.  Caesar, as Consul (59 B.C.), supported by Pompey and Crassus used violence and disruption to achieve what each individually wanted.  Cicero opposed the Big Three but in the end Caesar allowed Clodius to become eligible for the Tribunate.  Clodius used this office to pass measures to allow the formation of political clubs.  These were used to employ former slaves and people of violence to pass his measures .  These at first were opposed by various people but in the riots, people were injured and some lost their lives.  Feeding these clubbers became easy as Clodius passed a law which distributed food for free.

Soon Clodius (Tribune 58 B.C.) turned toward Cicero and had him exiled for putting to death Roman citizens without trial.  Decrees passed by the Senate indemnifying those involved were swept aside. Many attempts were made to support Cicero but to no avail. Although Cicero never forgave those he felt should have offered stronger support. 

In exile Cicero was devastated.  In fact he may have been near a mental break down.  But Lacey does point out that Cicero even in these circumstances did take the time to think of others.  It is a matter for debate, for sure.

In January of 57 B.C., Quintus, brother of Cicero, nearly lost his life attempting to move along Cicero’s recall.  With difficulty Cicero was recalled.  It is interesting that crowds turned out to greet him upon his entrance to Rome.  Many expected him to retire but he had no intention of doing so.

Lacey has a nice chapter on Cicero’s literary activity.  It is well worth reading to get a handle on Cicero’s output and ideas he presents.

Lacey covers the events of Cicero’s life through the 50’s.  Sometimes he manages to take a free hand and pursue policy of interest to him, at other times he is compelled to bend to the will of the Big Three.  

Lacey covers Cicero’s tenure as Governor of Cilicia.  It is interesting to see Cicero in this capacity.  It is also interesting to see the problems Cicero faced.

When Cicero returned from Cilicia, he tried to prevent the outbreak of a civil war but failed to do so.  It is a complex period to say the least.  The civil war was fought.  Caesar won at the cost of thousands of lives and at the cost of serious disruption to politics of persuasion.

Lacey also covers the heart rendering loss of his daughter, Tullia.

Caesar was assassinated March 15, 44 B.C.  Cicero entered politics for the last time to attempt to save the state.  Upon Caesar’s death Cicero decided to oppose Antony because Antony indicated that he intended to take Caesar’s place.      

Cicero argued in the Senate on December 20, 44 B.C. that those governors now in place at their provinces should remain there until further notice.  This effectively made it illegal for Antony to march against the governor of Gaul.  Some think that what Cicero did was illegal.   But Lacey points out that when the Senate December 20, 44 B.C. passed a decree concerning the provinces assigned by a law of the people, this decree suspended those laws until a new measure could be presented to the people. It is not an easy issue to figure out.  

Some historians claim that Cicero hated Antony because he was married to Fulvia, the wife of Clodius (who had died) whom Cicero hated.  The argument is that Cicero was responsible for the hostility against Antony and this precipitated another civil war. But Lacey points out that the people elected ten tribunes who took office December 10, 44 B.C.  All ten moved that a Senate meeting needed to be held to deal with the crisis.  Not one vetoed the proposals moved by Cicero and passed by the Senate.  He also makes the point that the Senate which consisted of many members appointed by Caesar himself approved the measure and that all this was done in one day. When Cicero addressed the people, there was huge applause.

Cicero seemed to be everywhere.  His arguments were so strong that he dominated the Senate debate for months.  His success seemed assured when Antony was defeated.  But in the course of doing so, the Consuls sent north to fight Antony both died.  This left a huge gap in elected leadership.  Octavian demanded the Consulship and received it by force.  Antony perhaps put out feelers to Octavian.  Soon they met at Bononia, in northern Italy.  A proscription list was drawn up.  Cicero’s name came first.  He heard the news at Tusculum.  He moved from there to Astura on the coast.  From there he moved to Formiae from which he hoped to set sail.  No one knows why for sure but he set sail and then returned to Formiae.  There he was caught by those sent to kill him, December 7, 43 B.C..  He offered no resistance.