Roman life in
the days of Cicero
by
Alfred J. Church
TO OCTAVIUS OGLE, IN REMEMBRANCE OF A LONG FRIENDSHIP THIS
BOOK IS DEDICATED.
CONTENTS:
DEDICATION: 2
PREFACE. 4
CHAPTER
I. A ROMAN BOY. 5
CHAPTER
II. A ROMAN UNDERGRADUATE. 13
CHAPTER
III. IN THE DAYS OF THE DICTATOR. 18
CHAPTER
IV. A ROMAN MAGISTRATE. 24
CHAPTER
V. A GREAT ROMAN CAUSE. 35
CHAPTER
VI. COUNTRY LIFE. 40
CHAPTER
VII. A GREAT CONSPIRACY. 44
CHAPTER
VIII. CAESAR. 50
CHAPTER
IX. POMPEY. 58
CHAPTER
X. EXILE. 63
CHAPTER
XI. A BRAWL AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 71
CHAPTER
XII. CATO, BRUTUS, AND PORCIA. 75
CHAPTER
XIII. A GOVERNOR IN HIS PROVINCE. 80
CHAPTER
XIV. ATTICUS. 86
CHAPTER
XV. ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS. 90
PREFACE.
This book does not claim to be a life of Cicero
or a history of the last days of the Roman
Republic. Still less does
it pretend to come into comparison with such a work as Bekker's
_Gallus_, in which on a slender thread of narrative is hung a vast amount of
facts relating to the social life of the Romans. I have tried to group round
the central figure of Cicero various sketches of
men and manners, and so to give my readers some idea of what life actually was
in Rome, and the provinces of Rome, during the first six decades--to speak
roughly--of the first century B.C. I speak of Cicero as the "central
figure," not as judging him to be the most important man of the time, but
because it is from him, from his speeches and letters, that we chiefly derive
the information of which I have here made use. Hence it follows that I give,
not indeed a life of the great orator, but a sketch of his personality and
career. I have been obliged also to trespass on the domain of history: speaking
of Cicero, I was obliged to speak also of Caesar
and of Pompey, of Cato and of Antony,
and to give a narrative, which I have striven to make as brief as possible, of
their military achievements and political action. I must apologize for seeming
to speak dogmatically on some questions which have been much disputed. It would
have been obviously inconsistent with the character of the book to give the
opposing arguments; and my only course was to state simply conclusions which I
had done my best to make correct.
I have to acknowledge my obligations to Marquardt's _Privat-Leben der Romer_, Mr. Capes' _University Life in Ancient Athens_, and
Mr. Watson's _Select Letters of Cicero_, I have also made frequent use of Mr.
Anthony Trollope's _Life of Cicero_, a work full of sound sense, though
curiously deficient in scholarship.
The publishers and myself hope that
the illustrations, giving as there is good reason to believe they do the
veritable likenesses of some of the chief actors in the scenes described, will
have a special interest. It is not till we come down to comparatively recent
times that we find art again lending the same aid to the understanding of
history.
Some apology should perhaps be made for retaining the
popular title of one of the illustrations. The learned are, we believe, agreed
that the statue known as the "Dying Gladiator" does not represent a
gladiator at all. Yet it seemed pedantic, in view of Byron's famous
description, to let it appear under any other name.
ALFRED CHURCH.
HADLEY GREEN _October_ 8, 1883.
ROMAN LIFE IN THE DAYS OF CICERO.
CHAPTER I.
A ROMAN BOY.
A Roman father's first duty to his boy, after lifting him up
in his arms in token that he was a true son of the house, was to furnish him
with a first name out of the scanty list (just seventeen) to which his choice
was limited. This naming was done on the eighth day after birth, and was
accompanied with some religious ceremonies, and with a feast to which kinsfolk
were invited. Thus named he was enrolled in some family or state register. The
next care was to protect him from the malignant influence of the evil eye by
hanging round his neck a gilded _bulla_, a round plate of metal. (The _bulla_
was of leather if he was not of gentle birth.) This he wore till he assumed the
dress of manhood. Then he laid it aside, possibly to assume it once more, if he
attained the crowning honor to which a Roman could aspire, and was drawn in
triumph up the slope of the Capitol. He was nursed by his mother, or, in any
case, by a free-born woman. It was his mother that had exclusive charge of him
for the first seven years of his life, and had much to say to the ordering of
his life afterwards. For Roman mothers were not shut up like their sisters in
Greece, but played no small part in affairs--witness the histories or legends
(for it matters not for this purpose whether they are fact or fiction) of the
Sabine wives, of Tullia, who stirred up her husband
to seize a throne, or Veturia, who turned her son
Coriolanus from his purpose of besieging Rome. At seven began the education
which was to make him a citizen and a soldier. Swimming, riding, throwing the
javelin developed his strength of body. He learned at the same time to be
frugal, temperate in eating and drinking, modest and seemly in behavior,
reverent to his elders, obedient to authority at home and abroad, and above
all, pious towards the gods. If it was the duty of the father to act as priest
in some temple of the State (for the priests were not a class apart from their
fellow-citizens), or to conduct the worship in some chapel of the family, the
lad would act as _camillus_ or acolyte. When the
clients, the dependents of the house, trooped into the hall in the early
morning hours to pay their respects to their patron, or to ask his advice and
assistance in their affairs, the lad would stand by his father's chair and make
acquaintance with his humble friends. When the hall was thrown open, and high
festival was held, he would be present and hear the talk on public affairs or
on past times. He would listen to and sometimes take part in the songs which
celebrated great heroes. When the body of some famous soldier or statesman was
carried outside the walls to be buried or burned, he would be taken to hear the
oration pronounced over the bier.
At one time it was the custom, if we may believe a quaint
story which one of the Roman writers tells us, for the senators to introduce
their young sons to the sittings of their assembly, very much in the same way
as the boys of Westminster
School are admitted to
hear the debates in the Houses of Parliament. The story professes to show how
it was that one of the families of the race of Papirius
came to bear the name of _Praetextatus_, i.e., clad
in the _praetexta_ (the garb of boyhood), and it runs
thus:--"It was the custom in the early days of the Roman State that the
senators should bring their young sons into the Senate to the end that they
might learn in their early days how great affairs of the commonwealth were
managed. And that no harm should ensue to the city, it was strictly enjoined
upon the lads that they should not say aught of the things which they had heard
within the House. It happened on a day that the Senate, after long debate upon
a certain matter, adjourned the thing to the morrow. Hereupon the son of a certain
senator, named Papirius, was much importuned by his
mother to tell the matter which had been thus painfully debated. And when the
lad, remembering the command which had been laid upon him that he should be
silent about such matters, refused to tell it, the woman besought him to speak
more urgently, till at the last, being worn out by her importunities, he
contrived this thing. 'The Senate,' he said, 'debated whether something might
not be done whereby there should be more harmony in families than is now seen
to be; and whether, should it be judged expedient to make any change, this
should be to order that a husband should have many wives, or a wife should have
more husbands than one.' Then the woman, being much disturbed by the thing
which she had heard, hastened to all the matrons of her acquaintance, and
stirred them up not to suffer any such thing. Thus it came to pass that the
Senate, meeting the next day, were astonished beyond measure to see a great
multitude of women gathered together at the doors, who besought them not to
make any change; or, if any, certainly not to permit that a man should have
more wives than one. Then the young Papirius told the
story how his mother had questioned him, and how he had devised this story to
escape from her importunity. Thereupon the Senate, judging that all boys might
not have the same constancy and wit, and that the State might suffer damage
from the revealing of things that had best be kept secret, made this law, that
no sons of a senator should thereafter come into the House, save only this
young Papirius, but that he should have the right to
come so long as he should wear the _praetexta_."
While this general education was going on, the lad was
receiving some definite teaching. He learned of course to read, to write, and
to cypher. The elder Cato used to write in large
characters for the benefit of his sons portions of history, probably composed
by himself or by his contemporary Fabius, surnamed
the "Painter" (the author of a chronicle of Italy from the
landing of Aeneas down to the end of the Second Punic War). He was tempted to
learn by playthings, which ingeniously combined instruction and amusement.
Ivory letters--probably in earlier times a less costly material was used--were
put into his hands, just as they are put into the hands of children now-a-days,
that he might learn how to form words. As soon as reading was acquired, he
began to learn by heart. "When we were boys," Cicero represents himself as saying to his
brother Quintus, in one of his Dialogues, "we used to learn the 'Twelve
Tables.'" The "Twelve Tables" were the laws which Appius of evil fame and his colleagues the decemvirs had arranged in a code. "No one," he
goes on to say, "learns them now." Books had
become far more common in the forty years which had passed between Cicero's
boyhood and the time at which he is supposed to be speaking; and the tedious
lesson of his early days had given place to something more varied and
interesting.
Writing the boy learned by following with the pen (a
sharp-pointed _stylus_ of metal), forms of letters which had been engraved on
tablets of wood. At first his hand was held and guided by the teacher. This was
judged by the experienced to be a better plan than allowing him to shape
letters for himself on the wax-covered tablet. Of
course parchment and paper were far too expensive materials to be used for
exercises and copies. As books were rare and costly, dictation became a matter
of much importance. The boy wrote, in part at least, his own schoolbooks.
Horace remembers with a shudder what he had himself written at the dictation of
his schoolmaster, who was accustomed to enforce good writing and spelling with
many blows. He never could reconcile himself to the early poets whose verse had
furnished the matter of these lessons.
Our Roman boy must have found arithmetic a more troublesome
thing than the figures now in use (for which we cannot be too thankful to the
Arabs their inventors) have made it. It is difficult to imagine how any thing
like a long sum in multiplication or division could have been done with the
Roman numerals, so cumbrous were they. The number, for instance, which we
represent by the figures 89 would require for its
expression no less than _nine_ figures, LXXXVIIII. The boy was helped by using
the fingers, the left hand being used to signify numbers below a hundred, and
the right numbers above it. Sometimes his teacher would have a counting-board,
on which units, tens, and hundreds would be represented by variously colored
balls. The sums which he did were mostly of a practical kind. Here is the
sample that Horace gives of an arithmetic lesson. "The Roman boys are
taught to divide the penny by long calculations. 'If
from five ounces be subtracted one, what is the
remainder?' At once you can answer, 'A third of a penny.' 'Good, you will be
able to take care of your money. If an ounce be added what does it make?' 'The half of a penny.'"
While he was acquiring this knowledge he was also learning a
language, the one language besides his own which to a Roman was worth
knowing--Greek. Very possibly he had begun to pick it up in the nursery, where
a Greek slave girl was to be found, just as the French _bonne_
or the German nursery-governess is among our own wealthier families. He
certainly began to acquire it when he reached the age at which his regular
education was commenced. Cato the Elder, though he made it a practice to teach
his own sons, had nevertheless a Greek slave who was capable of undertaking the
work, and who actually did teach, to the profit of his very frugal master, the
sons of other nobles. Aemilius, the conqueror of Macedonia, who
was a few years younger than Cato, had as a tutor a Greek of some distinction.
While preparing the procession of his triumph he had sent to Athens for a
scene-painter, as we should call him, who might make pictures of conquered
towns wherewith to illustrate his victories. He added to the commission a
stipulation that the artist should also be qualified to take the place of
tutor. By good fortune the Athenians happened to have in stock, so to speak,
exactly the man he wanted, one Metrodorus. Cicero had a Greek
teacher in his own family, not for his son indeed, who was not born till later,
but for his own benefit. This was one Diodotus, a
Stoic philosopher. Cicero
had been his pupil in his boyhood, and gave him a home till the day of his
death, "I learned many things from him, logic especially." In old age
he lost his sight. "Yet," says his pupil, "he devoted himself to
study even more diligently than before; he had books read to him night and day.
These were studies which he could pursue without his eyes; but he also, and
this seems almost incredible, taught geometry without them, instructing his
learners whence and whither the line was to be drawn, and of what kind it was
to be." It is interesting to know that when the old man died he left his
benefactor about nine thousand pounds.
Of course only wealthy Romans could command for their sons
the services of such teachers as Diodotus; but any
well-to-do-household contained a slave who had more or less acquaintance with
Greek. In Cicero's time a century and more of conquests on the part of Rome
over Greek and Greek-speaking communities had brought into Italian families a
vast number of slaves who knew the Greek language, and something, often a good
deal, of Greek literature. One of these would probably be set apart as the
boy's attendant; from him he would learn to speak and read a language, a knowledge of which was at least as common at Rome as is a knowledge of
French among English gentlemen.
If the Roman boy of whom we are speaking belonged to a very
wealthy and distinguished family, he would probably receive his education at
home. Commonly he would go to school. There were schools, girls' schools as
well as boys' schools, at Rome
in the days of the wicked Appius Claudius. The
schoolmaster appears among the Etruscans in the story of Camillus, when the
traitor, who offers to hand over to the Roman general the sons of the chief
citizen of Falerii, is at his command scourged back
into the town by his scholars. We find him again in the same story in the Latin
town of Tusculum, where it is mentioned as one of the signs of a time of
profound peace (Camillus had hurriedly marched against the town on a false
report of its having revolted), that the hum of scholars at their lessons was
heard in the market-place. At Rome,
as time went on, and the Forum became more and more busy and noisy, the schools
were removed to more suitable localities. Their appliances for teaching were
improved and increased. Possibly maps were added, certainly reading books.
Homer was read, and, as we have seen, the old Latin play-writers, and,
afterwards, Virgil. Horace threatens the book which willfully insists on going
out into the world with this fate, that old age will find it in a far-off
suburb teaching boys their letters. Some hundred years afterwards the prophecy
was fulfilled. Juvenal tells us how the schoolboys stood each with a lamp in
one hand and a well-thumbed Horace or sooty Virgil in the other. Quintilian,
writing about the same time, goes into detail, as becomes an old schoolmaster.
"It is an admirable practice that the boy's reading should begin with
Homer and Virgil. The tragic writers also are useful; and there is much benefit
to be got from the lyric poets also. But here you must make a selection not of
authors only, but a part of authors." It is curious to find him banishing
altogether a book that is, or certainly was, more extensively used in our
schools than any other classic, the Heroides of Ovid.
These, and such as these, then, are the books which our
Roman boy would have to read. Composition would not be forgotten. "Let him
take," says the author just quoted, "the fables of Aesop and tell
them in simple language, never rising above the ordinary level. Then let him
pass on to a style less plain; then, again, to bolder paraphrases, sometimes
shortening, sometimes amplifying the original, but always following his
sense." He also suggests the writing of themes and characters. One example
he gives is this, "Was Crates the philosopher right when, having met an
ignorant boy, he administered a beating to his teacher?" Many subjects of
these themes have been preserved. Hannibal
was naturally one often chosen. His passage of the Alps, and the question
whether he should have advanced on the city immediately after the battle of Cannae, were frequently discussed. Cicero mentions a subject of the speculative
kind. "It is forbidden to a stranger to mount the wall. A. mounts the
wall, but only to help the citizens in repelling their enemies. Has A. broken
the law?"
To make these studies more interesting to the Roman boy, his
schoolmaster called in the aid of emulation. "I feel sure," says
Quintilian, "that the practice which I remember to have been employed by
my own teachers was any thing but useless. They were accustomed to divide the
boys into classes, and they set us to speak in the order of our powers; every
one taking his turn according to his proficiency. Our performances were duly
estimated; and prodigious were the struggles which we had for victory. To be
the head of one's class was considered the most glorious thing conceivable. But
the decision was not made once for all. The next month brought the vanquished
an opportunity of renewing the contest. He who had been victorious in the first
encounter was not led by success to relax his efforts, and a feeling of
vexation impelled the vanquished to do away with the disgrace of defeat. This
practice, I am sure, supplied a keener stimulus to learning than did all the
exhortations of our teachers, the care of our tutors, and the wishes of our
parents." Nor did the schoolmaster trust to emulation alone. The third
choice of the famous Winchester
line, "Either learn, or go: there is yet another choice--to be flogged,"
was liberally employed. Horace celebrates his old schoolmaster as a "man
of many blows," and another distinguished pupil of this teacher, the Busby
or Keate of antiquity, has specified the weapons
which he employed, the ferule and the thong. The thong is the familiar "tawse" of schools north of the Border. The ferule was
a name given both to the bamboo and to the yellow cane, which grew plentifully
both in the islands of the Greek Archipelago and in Southern Italy, as notably
at Cannae in Apulia, where it gave a name to the scene of the great battle. The
_virga_ was also used, a rod commonly of birch, a
tree the educational use of which had been already discovered. The walls of Pompeii indeed show that the practice of Eton
is truly classical down to its details.
As to the advantage of the practice opinions were divided.
One enthusiastic advocate goes so far as to say that the Greek word for a cane
signifies by derivation, "the sharpener of the young" (_narthex, nearous thegein_), but the best
authorities were against it. Seneca is indignant with the savage who will
"butcher" a young learner because he hesitates at a word--a venial
fault indeed, one would think, when we remember what must have been the aspect
of a Roman book, written as it was in capitals, almost without stops, and with
little or no distinction between the words. And Quintilian is equally decided,
though he allows that flogging was an "institution."
As to holidays the practice of the Roman schools probably
resembled that which prevails in the Scotch Universities, though with a less
magnificent length of vacation. Every one had a holiday on the "days of
Saturn" (a festival beginning on the seventeenth of December), and the
schoolboys had one of their own on the "days of Minerva," which fell
in the latter half of March; but the "long vacation" was in the
summer. Horace speaks of lads carrying their fees to school on the fifteenth of
the month for eight months in the year (if this interpretation of a doubtful
passage is correct). Perhaps as this was a country school the holidays were
made longer than usual, to let the scholars take their part in the harvest,
which as including the vintage would not be over till somewhat late in the
autumn. We find Martial, however, imploring a schoolmaster to remember that the
heat of July was not favorable to learning, and suggesting that he should
abdicate his seat till the fifteenth of October brought a season more
convenient for study. Rome
indeed was probably deserted in the later summer and autumn by the wealthier
class, who were doubtless disposed to agree in the poet's remark, a remark to
which the idlest schoolboy will forgive its Latin for the sake of its admirable
sentiment:
"Aestate pueri si valent
satis discunt."
"In summer boys learn enough, if they keep their health."
Something, perhaps, may be said of the teachers, into whose
hands the boys of Rome
were committed. We have a little book, of not more than twoscore
pages in all, which gives us "lives of illustrious schoolmasters;"
and from which we may glean a few facts. The first business of a schoolmaster
was to teach grammar, and grammar Rome owed, as
she owed most of her knowledge, to a Greek, a certain Crates, who coming as
ambassador from one of the kings of Asia Minor, broke his leg while walking in
the ill-paved streets of Rome,
and occupied his leisure by giving lectures at his house. Most of the early
teachers were Greeks. Catulus bought a Greek slave
for somewhat more than fifteen hundred pounds, and giving him his freedom set
him up as a schoolmaster; another of the same nation received a salary of
between three and four hundred pounds, his patron taking and probably making a
considerable profit out of the pupils' fees. Orbilius,
the man of blows, was probably of Greek descent. He had been first a beadle,
then a trumpeter, then a trooper in his youth, and came to Rome
in the year in which Cicero
was consul. He seems to have been as severe on the parents of his pupils as he
was in another way on the lads themselves, for he wrote a book in which he
exposed their meanness and ingratitude. His troubles, however, did not prevent
him living to the great age of one hundred and three. The author of the little
book about schoolmasters had seen his statue in his native town. It was a
marble figure, in a sitting posture, with two writing desks beside it. The
favorite authors of Orbilius, who was of the
old-fashioned school, were, as has been said, the early dramatists. Caecilius, a younger man, to whom Atticus the friend and
correspondent of Cicero
gave his freedom, lectured on Virgil, with whom, as he was intimate with one of
Virgil's associates, he probably had some acquaintance. A certain Flaccus had the credit of having first invented prizes. He
used to pit lads of equal age against each other, supplying not only a subject
on which to write, but a prize for the victor. This was commonly some handsome
or rare old book. Augustus made him tutor to his grandsons, giving him a salary
of eight hundred pounds per annum. Twenty years later, a fashionable schoolmaster
is said to have made between three and four thousands.
These schoolmasters were also sometimes teachers of
eloquence, lecturing to men. One Gnipho, for
instance, is mentioned among them, as having held his classes in the house of
Julius Caesar (Caesar was left an orphan at fifteen); and afterwards, when his
distinguished pupil was grown up, in his own. But Cicero, when he was
praetor, and at the very height of his fame, is said to have attended his
lectures. This was the year in which he delivered the very finest of his
non-political speeches, his defence of Cluentius. He must have been a very clever teacher from
whom so great an orator hoped to learn something.
These teachers of eloquence were what we may call the
"Professors" of Rome.
A lad had commonly "finished his education" when he put on the
"man's gown;" but if he thought of political life, of becoming a
statesman, and taking office in the commonwealth, he had much yet to learn. He
had to make himself a lawyer and an orator. Law he learned by attaching
himself, by becoming the pupil, as we should say, of some great man that was
famed for his knowledge. Cicero
relates to us his own experience: "My father introduced me to the Augur Scaevola; and the result was that, as far as possible and
permissible, I never left the old man's side. Thus I committed to memory many a
learned argument of his, many a terse and clever maxim, while I sought to add
to my own knowledge from his stores of special learning. When the Augur died I
betook myself to the Pontiff of the same name and family." Elsewhere we
have a picture of this second Scaevola and his
pupils. "Though he did not undertake to give instruction to any one, yet
he practically taught those who were anxious to listen to him by allowing them
to hear his answers to those who consulted him." These consultations took
place either in the Forum or at his own house. In the
Forum the great lawyer indicated that clients were at liberty to approach by
walking across the open space from corner to corner. The train of young Romans
would then follow his steps, just as the students follow the physician or the
surgeon through the wards of a hospital. When he gave audience at home they
would stand by his chair. It must be remembered that the great man took no payment
either from client or from pupil.
But the young Roman had not only to learn law, he must also
learn how to speak-learn, as far as such a thing can be learned, how to be
eloquent. What we in this country call the career of the public man was there
called the career of the orator. With us it is much a matter of chance whether
a man can speak or not. We have had statesmen who wielded all the power that
one man ever can wield in this country who had no sort of eloquence. We have
had others who had this gift in the highest degree, but never reached even one
of the lower offices in the government. Sometimes a young politician will go to
a professional teacher to get cured of some defect or trick of speech; but that
such teaching is part of the necessary training of a statesman is an idea quite
strange to us. A Roman received it as a matter of course. Of course, like other
things at Rome,
it made its way but slowly. Just before the middle of the second century b.c. the Senate resolved: "Seeing that mention has been
made of certain philosophers and rhetoricians, let Pomponius
the praetor see to it, as he shall hold it to be for the public good, and for
his own honor, that none such be found at Rome." Early in the first
century the censors issued an edict forbidding certain Latin rhetoricians to
teach. One of these censors was the great orator Crassus, greatest of all the
predecessors of Cicero.
Cicero puts
into his mouth an apology for this proceeding: "I was not actuated by any
hostility to learning or culture. These Latin rhetoricians were mere ignorant
pretenders, inefficient imitators of their Greek rivals, from whom the Roman
youth were not likely to learn any thing but impudence." In spite of the
censors, however, and in spite of the fashionable belief in Rome that what was Greek must be far better
than what was of native growth, the Latin teachers rose into favor. "I
remember," says Cicero, "when we were boys, one Lucius
Plotinus, who was the first to teach eloquence in Latin; how, when the studious
youth of the capital crowded to hear him it vexed me much, that I was not
permitted to attend him. I was checked, however, by the opinion of learned men,
who held that in this matter the abilities of the young were more profitably
nourished by exercises in Greek." We are reminded of our own Doctor
Johnson, who declared that he would not disgrace the walls of Westminster Abbey
by an epitaph in English.
The chief part of the instruction which these teachers gave
was to propose imaginary cases involving some legal difficulty for their pupils
to discuss. One or two of these cases may be given.
One day in summer a party of young men from Rome made an
excursion to Ostia, and coming down to the seashore found there some fishermen
who were about to draw in a net. With these they made a bargain that they
should have the draught for a certain sum. The money was paid. When the net was
drawn up no fish were found in it, but a hamper sewn with thread of gold. The
buyers allege this to be theirs as the draught of the net. The fishermen claim
it as not being fish. To whom did it belong?
Certain slave-dealers, landing a cargo of slaves at Brundisium, and having with them a very beautiful boy of
great value, fearing lest the custom-house officers should lay hands upon him,
put upon him the _bulla_ and the purple-edged robe that free-born lads were
wont to wear. The deceit was not discovered. But when they came to Rome, and the matter was
talked of, it was maintained that the boy was really free, seeing that it was
his master who of his own free will had given him the token of freedom.
I shall conclude this chapter with a very pretty picture,
which a Roman poet draws of the life which he led with his teacher in the days
when he was first entering upon manhood. "When first my timid steps lost
the guardianship of the purple stripe, and the _bulla_ of the boy was hung up
for offering to the quaint household gods; when flattering comrades came about
me, and I might cast my eyes without rebuke over the whole busy street under
the shelter of the yet unsullied gown; in the days when the path is doubtful,
and the wanderer knowing naught of life comes with bewildered soul to the
many-branching roads--then I made myself your adopted child. You took at once
into the bosom of another Socrates my tender years; your rule, applied with
skillful disguise, straightens each perverse habit; nature is molded by reason,
and struggles to be subdued, and assumes under your hands its plastic
lineaments. Ay, well I mind how I would wear away long summer suns with you,
and pluck with you the bloom of night's first hours. One work we had, one
certain time for rest, and at one modest table unbent from sterner
thoughts."
It accords with this charming picture to be told that the
pupil, dying in youth, left his property to his old tutor, and that the latter
handed it over to the kinsfolk of the deceased, keeping for himself the books
only.
CHAPTER II.
A ROMAN UNDERGRADUATE.
In the last chapter we had no particular "Roman
Boy" in view; but our "Roman Undergraduate" will be a real
person, Cicero's
son. It will be interesting to trace the notices which we find of him in his
father's letters and books. "You will be glad to hear," he writes in
one of his earliest letters to Atticus, "that a little son has been born
to me, and that Terentia is doing well." From
time to time we hear of him, and always spoken of in terms of the tenderest affection. He is his "honey-sweet
Cicero," his "little philosopher." When the father is in exile
the son's name is put on the address of his letters along with those of his
mother and sister. His prospects are the subject of most anxious thought. Terentia, who had a considerable fortune of her own,
proposes to sell an estate. "Pray think," he writes, "what will
happen to us. If the same ill fortune shall continue to pursue us, what will
happen to our unhappy boy? I cannot write any more. My tears fairly overpower
me; I should be sorry to make you as sad as myself. I will say so much. If my
friends do their duty by me, I shall not want for money; if they do not, your
means will not save me. I do implore you, by all our troubles,
do not ruin the poor lad. Indeed he is ruined enough already. If he has only
something to keep him from want, then modest merit and moderate good fortune
will give him all he wants."
Appointed to the government of Cilicia, Cicero takes his son with him into the
province. When he starts on his campaign against the mountain tribes, the boy
and his cousin, young Quintus, are sent to the court of Deiotarus,
one of the native princes of Galatia.
"The young Ciceros,"
he writes to Atticus, "are with Deiotarus. If
need be, they will be taken to Rhodes."
Atticus, it may be mentioned, was uncle to Quintus, and might be anxious about
him. The need was probably the case of the old prince himself marching to Cicero's help. This he
had promised to do, but the campaign was finished without him. This was in the
year 51 B.C., and Marcus was nearly fourteen years old, his cousin being his
senior by about two years. "They are very fond of each other," writes
Cicero;
"they learn, they amuse themselves together, but one wants the rein, the
other the spur." (Doubtless the latter is the writer's son.) "I am
very fond of Dionysius their teacher: the lads say that he is apt to get
furiously angry. But a more learned and more blameless man there does not
live." A year or so afterwards he seems to have thought less favorably of
him. "I let him go reluctantly when I thought of him as the tutor of the
two lads, but quite willingly as an ungrateful fellow." In B.C. 49, when
the lad was about half through his sixteenth year, Cicero "gave him his _toga_." To
take the _toga_, that is to exchange the gown of the boy with its stripe of
purple for the plain white gown of the citizen, marked the beginning of independence
(though indeed a Roman's son was even in mature manhood under his father's
control). The ceremony took place at Arpinum, much to
the delight of the inhabitants, who felt of course the greatest pride and
interest in their famous fellow-townsman. But it was a sad time. "There and every where as I journeyed I saw sorrow and dismay.
The prospect of this vast trouble is sad indeed." The "vast
trouble" was the civil war between Caesar and Pompey. This indeed had
already broken out. While Cicero was entertaining
his kinsfolk and friends at Arpinum, Pompey was
preparing to fly from Italy.
The war was probably not an unmixed evil to a lad who was just beginning to
think himself a man. He hastened across the Adriatic
to join his father's friend, and was appointed to the command of a squadron of
auxiliary cavalry. His maneuvers were probably assisted by some veteran
subordinate; but his I seat on horseback, his skill with the javelin, and his
general soldierly qualities were highly praised both by his chief and by his
comrades. After the defeat at Pharsalia he waited
with his father at Brundisium till a kind letter from
Caesar assured him of pardon. In B.C. 46 he was made aedile
at Arpinum, his cousin being appointed at the same
time. The next year he would have gladly resumed his military career. Fighting
was going on in Spain, where the sons of Pompey were holding out against the
forces of Caesar; and the young Cicero, who was probably not very particular on
which side he drew his sword, was ready to take service against the son of his
old general. Neither the cause nor the career pleased the father, and the son's
wish was overruled, just as an English lad has sometimes to give up the unremunerative profession of arms, when there is a living
in the family, or an opening in a bank, or a promising connection with a firm
of solicitors. It was settled that he should take up his residence at Athens, which was then the university of Rome,
not indeed exactly in the sense in which Oxford
and Cambridge are the universities of England,
but still a place of liberal culture, where the sons of wealthy Roman families
were accustomed to complete their education. Four-and-twenty years before the
father had paid a long visit to the city, partly for study's sake. "In
those days," he writes, "I was emaciated and feeble to a degree; my
neck was long and thin; a habit of body and a figure that are thought to
indicate much danger to life, if aggravated by a laborious profession and
constant straining of the voice. My friends thought the more of this, because
in those days I was accustomed to deliver all my speeches without any
relaxation of effort, without any variety, at the very top of my voice, and
with most abundant gesticulation. At first, when friends and physicians advised
me to abandon advocacy for a while, I felt that I would sooner run any risk
than relinquish the hope of oratorical distinction. Afterwards I reflected that
by learning to moderate and regulate my voice, and changing my style of
speaking, I might both avert the danger that threatened my health and also
acquire a more self-controlled manner. It was a resolve to break through the
habits I had formed that induced me to travel to the East. I had practiced for
two years, and my name had become well known when I left Rome. Coming to Athens
I spent six months with Antiochus, the most distinguished and learned
philosopher of the Old
Academy, than whom there
was no wiser or more famous teacher. At the same time I practiced myself
diligently under the care of Demetrius Syrus, an old
and not undistinguished master of eloquence." To Athens,
then, Cicero
always looked back with affection. He hears, for instance, that Appius is going to build a portico at Eleusis. "Will you think me a
fool," he writes to Atticus, "if I do the same at the Academy? 'I think so,' you will say. But I love Athens, the very place, much; and I shall be
glad to have some memorial of me there."
The new undergraduate, as we should call him, was to have a
liberal allowance. "He shall have as much as Publilius,
as much as Lentulus the Flamen,
allow their sons." It would be interesting to know the amount, but
unhappily this cannot be recovered. All that we know is that the richest young
men in Rome
were not to have more. "I will guarantee," writes this liberal father,
"that none of the three young men [whom he names] who, I hear, will be at Athens at the same time
shall live at more expense than he will be able to do on those rents."
These "rents" were the incomings from certain properties at Rome. "Only,"
he adds, "I do not think he will want a horse."
We know something of the university buildings, so to speak,
which the young Cicero found at Athens. "To seek for truth among the
groves of Academus" is the phrase by which a
more famous contemporary, the poet Horace, describes his studies at Athens. He probably uses
it generally to express philosophical pursuits; taken strictly it would mean
that he attached himself to the sage whose pride it was to be the successor of
Plato. Academus was a local hero, connected with the
legend of Theseus and Helen. Near his grove, or
sacred inclosure, which adjoined the road to Eleusis, Plato had bought
a garden. It was but a small spot, purchased for a sum which maybe represented
by about three or four hundred pounds of our money, but it had been enlarged by
the liberality of successive benefactors. This then was one famous
lecture-room. Another was the Lyceum. Here Aristotle had taught, and after
Aristotle, Theophrastus, and after him, a long succession of thinkers of the
same school. A third institution of the same kind was the garden in which
Epicurus had assembled his disciples, and which he bequeathed to trustees for
their benefit and the benefit of their successors for all time.
To a Roman of the nobler sort these gardens and buildings
must have been as holy places. It was with these rather than with the temples
of gods that he connected what there was of goodness and purity in his life. To
worship Jupiter or Romulus
did not make him a better man, though it might be his necessary duty as a
citizen; his real religion, as we understand it, was his reverence for Plato or
Zeno. Athens to him was not only what Athens, but what the Holy Land
is to us. Cicero
describes something of this feeling in the following passage: "We had been
listening to Antiochus (a teacher of the Academics) in the school called the Ptolemaeus, where he was wont to lecture. Marcus Piso was with me, and my brother Quintus, and Atticus, and Lucius Cicero, by relationship a cousin, in affection a
brother. We agreed among ourselves to finish our afternoon walk in the Academy,
chiefly because that place was sure not to be crowded at that hour. At the
proper time we met at Piso's house; thence, occupied
with varied talk, we traversed the six furlongs that lie between the Double
Gate and the Academy; and entering the walls which can give such good reason
for their fame, found there the solitude which we sought. 'Is it,' said Piso, 'by some natural instinct or through some delusion
that when we see the very spots where famous men have lived we are far more
touched than when we hear of the things that they have done, or read something
that they have written? It is thus that I am affected at this moment. I think
of Plato, who was, we are told, the first who lectured in this place; his
little garden which lies there close at hand seems not only to remind me of
him, but actually to bring him up before my eyes. Here spake
Speusippus, here Xenocrates,
here his disciple Polemo--to Polemo
indeed belonged this seat which we have before us.'" This was the Polemo who had been converted, as we should say, when,
bursting in after a night of revel upon a lecture in which Xenocrates
was discoursing of temperance, he listened to such purpose that from that
moment he became a changed man. Then Atticus describes how he found the same
charms of association in the garden which had belonged to his own master,
Epicurus; while Quintus Cicero supplies what we should call the classical
element by speaking of Sophocles and the grove of Colonus,
still musical, it seems, with the same song of the nightingale which had
charmed the ear of the poet more than three centuries before.
One or other, perhaps more than one, of these famous places
the young Cicero
frequented. He probably witnessed, he possibly took part (for strangers were
admitted to membership) in, the celebrations with which the college of Athenian
youths (Ephebi) commemorated the glories of their
city, the procession to the tombs of those who died at Marathon, and the
boat-races in the Bay
of Salamis. That he gave
his father some trouble is only too certain. His private tutor in rhetoric, as
we should call him, was a certain Gorgias, a man of
ability, and a writer of some note, but a worthless and profligate fellow. Cicero peremptorily
ordered his son to dismiss him; and the young man seems to have obeyed and
reformed. We may hope at least that the repentance which he expresses for his
misdoings in a letter to Tiro, his father's freedman,
was genuine. This is his picture of his life in the days of repentance and
soberness: "I am on terms of the closest intimacy with Cratippus,
living with him more as a son than as a pupil. Not only do I hear his lectures
with delight, but I am greatly taken with the geniality which is peculiar to
the man. I spend whole days with him, and often no small part of the night; for
I beg him to dine with me as often as he can. This has become so habitual with
him that he often looks in upon us at dinner when we are not expecting him; he
lays aside the sternness of the philosopher and jokes with us in the
pleasantest fashion. As for Bruttius, he never leaves
me; frugal and strict as is his life, he is yet a most delightful companion. For we do not entirely banish mirth from our daily studies in
philology. I have hired a lodging for him close
by; and do my best to help his poverty out of my own narrow means. I have begun
to practice Greek declamation with Cassius, and wish to have a Latin course
with Bruttius. My friends and daily companions are
the pupils whom Cratippus brought with him from Mitylene, well-read men, of whom he highly approves. I also
see much of Epicrates, who is the first man at Athens." After some
pleasant words to Tiro, who had bought a farm, and
whom he expects to find turned into a farmer, bringing stores, holding
consultations with his bailiff, and putting by fruit-seeds in his pocket from
dessert, he says, "I should be glad if you would send me as quickly as
possible a copyist, a Greek by preference. I have to spend much
pains on writing out my notes."
A short time before one of Cicero's friends had sent a satisfactory
report of the young man's behavior to his father. "I found your son
devoted to the most laudable studies and enjoying an excellent reputation for
steadiness. Don't fancy, my dear Cicero, that I say this to please you; there
is not in Athens a more lovable young man than your son, nor one more devoted
to those high pursuits in which you would have him interested."
Among the contemporaries of the young Cicero was, as has been said, the poet
Horace. His had been a more studious boyhood. He had not been taken away from
his books to serve as a cavalry officer under Pompey. In him accordingly we see
the regular course of the studies of a Roman lad. "It was my lot," he
says, "to be bred up at Rome,
and to be taught how much the wrath of Achilles harmed the Greeks. In other
words, he had read his Homer, just as an English boy reads him at Eton or Harrow. "Kind Athens,"
he goes on, "added a little more learning, to the end that I might be able
to distinguish right from wrong, and to seek for truth amongst the groves of Academus." And just in the same way the English youth
goes on to read philosophy at Oxford.
The studies of the two young men were interrupted by the
same cause, the civil war which followed the death of Caesar. They took service
with Brutus, both having the same rank, that of military tribune, a command
answering more or less nearly to that of colonel in our own army. It was,
however, mainly an ornamental rank, being bestowed sometimes by favor of the
general in command, sometimes by a popular vote. The young Cicero indeed had already served, and he now
distinguished himself greatly, winning some considerable successes in the
command of the cavalry which Brutus afterwards gave him. When the hopes of the
party were crushed at Phillippi, he joined the
younger Pompey in Sicily; but took an
opportunity of an amnesty which was offered four years afterwards to return to Rome. Here he must have
found his old fellow-student, who had also reconciled himself to the victorious
party. He was made one of the college of augurs, and also a commissioner of the
mint, and in B.C. 30 he had the honour of sharing the consulship with Augustus
himself. It was to him that the dispatch announcing the final defeat and death
of Antony was
delivered; and it fell to him to execute the decree which ordered the
destruction of all the statues of the fallen chief. "Then," says
Plutarch, "by the ordering of heaven the punishment of Antony
was inflicted at last by the house of Cicero."
His time of office ended, he went as Governor to Asia, or, according to some
accounts, to Syria;
and thus disappears from our view.
Pliny the Elder tells us that he was a drunkard,
sarcastically observing that he sought to avenge himself on Antony by robbing him of the reputation which
he had before enjoyed of being the hardest drinker of the time. As the story
which he tells of the younger Cicero being able
to swallow twelve pints of wine at a draught is clearly incredible, perhaps we
may disbelieve the whole, and with it the other anecdote, that he threw a cup
at the head of Marcus Agrippa, son-in-law to the Emperor, and after him the
greatest man in Rome.
CHAPTER III.
IN THE DAYS OF THE DICTATOR.
In November 82 B.C., Cornelius Sulla became absolute master
of Rome. It is
not part of my purpose to give a history of this man. He was a great soldier
who had won victories in Africa and Asia over the enemies of Rome, and in Italy
itself over the "allies," as they were called, that is the Italian
nations, who at various times had made treaties with Rome, and who in the early
part of the first century B.C. rebelled against her, thinking that they were
robbed of the rights and privileges which belonged to them. And he was the
leader of the party of the nobles, just as Marius was the leader of the party
of the people. Once before he had made himself supreme in the capital; and then
he had used his power with moderation. But he was called away to carry on the
war in Asia against Mithridates, the great King of
Pontus; and his enemies had got the upper hand, and had used the opportunity
most cruelly. A terrible list of victims, called the "proscription,"
because it was posted up in the forum, was prepared. Fifty senators and a
thousand knights (peers and gentlemen we should call them) were put to death,
almost all of them without any kind of trial. Sulla himself was outlawed. But
he had an army which he had led to victory and had enriched with prize-money,
and which was entirely devoted to him; and he was not inclined to let his
enemies triumph. He hastened back to Italy, and landed in the spring of
83. In the November of the following year, just outside the walls of Rome, was fought the
final battle of the war.
The opposing army was absolutely destroyed and Sulla had
every thing at his mercy. He waited for a few days outside the city till the
Senate had passed a decree giving him absolute power to change the laws, to
fill the offices of State, and to deal with the lives and properties of
citizens as it might please him. This done, he entered Rome. Then came
another proscription. The chief of his enemies, Marius.
was gone. He had died, tormented it was said by
remorse, seventeen days after he had reached the crowning glory, promised him
in his youth by an oracle, and had been made consul for the seventh time. The
conqueror had to content himself with the same vengeance that Charles II. in our own country exacted from the remains of Cromwell. The
ashes of Marius were taken out of his tomb on the Flaminian Way, the great North Road of Rome, and were thrown
into the Anio. But many of his friends and partisans
survived, and these were slaughtered without mercy. Eighty names were put on
the fatal list on the first day, two hundred and twenty on the second, and as
many more on the third. With the deaths of many of these victims politics had
nothing to do. Sulla allowed his friends and favorites to put into the list the
names of men against whom they happened to bear a grudge, or whose property
they coveted. No one knew who might be the next to fall. Even Sulla's own
partisans were alarmed. A young senator, Caius Metellus,
one of a family which was strongly attached to Sulla and with which he was
connected by marriage, had the courage to ask him in public when there would be
an end to this terrible state of things. "We do not beg you," he
said, "to remit the punishment of those whom you have made up your mind to
remove; we do beg you to do away with the anxiety of those whom you have
resolved to spare." "I am not yet certain," answered Sulla,
"whom I shall spare." "Then at least," said Metellus, "you can tell us whom you mean to
punish." "That I will do," replied the tyrant. It was indeed a
terrible time that followed, Plutarch thus describes it: "He denounced
against any who might shelter or save the life of a proscribed person the
punishment of death for his humanity. He made no exemption for mother, or son,
or parent. The murderers received a payment of two talents (about
?470) for each victim; it was paid to a slave who killed his master, to
a son who killed his father. The most monstrous thing of all, it was thought,
was that the sons and grandsons of the proscribed were declared to be legally
infamous and that their property was confiscated. Nor was it only in Rome but in all the cities of Italy that the proscription was
carried out. There was not a single temple, not a house but was polluted with
blood. Husbands were slaughtered in the arms of their wives, and sons in the
arms of their mothers. And the number of those who fell victims to anger and
hatred was but small in comparison with the number who were
put out of the way for the sake of their property. The murderers might well
have said: 'His fine mansion has been the death of this man; or his gardens, or
his baths.' Quintus Aurelius, a peaceable citizen, who had had only this share
in the late civil troubles, that he had felt for the misfortunes of others,
coming into the forum, read the list of the proscribed and found in it his own
name. 'Unfortunate that I am,' he said, 'it is my farm at Alba that has been my
ruin;' and he had not gone many steps before he was cut down by a man that was
following him. Lucius Catiline's
conduct was especially wicked. He had murdered his own brother. This was before
the proscription began. He went to Sulla and begged that the name might be put
in the list as if the man were still alive; and it was so put. His gratitude to
Sulla was shown by his killing one Marius, who belonged to the opposite
faction, and bringing his head to Sulla as he sat in the forum. (This Marius
was a kinsman of the great democratic leader, and was one of the most popular
men in Rome.)
This done, he washed his hands in the holy water-basin of the temple of Apollo."
Forty senators and sixteen hundred knights, and more than as
many men of obscure station, are said to have perished. At last, on the first
of June, 81, the list was closed. Still the reign of terror was not yet at an
end, as the strange story which I shall now relate will amply prove. To look into
the details of a particular case makes us better able to imagine what it really
was to live at Rome
in the days of the Dictator than to read many pages of general description. The
story is all the more impressive because the events happened after order had
been restored and things were supposed to be proceeding in their regular
course.
The proscription came to an end, as has been said, in the
early summer of 81. In the autumn of the same year a certain Sextus Roscius was murdered in
the streets of Rome
as he was returning home from dinner. Roscius was a
native of Ameria, a little town of Etruria,
between fifty and sixty miles north of Rome.
He was a wealthy man, possessed, it would seem, of
some taste and culture, and an intimate friend of some of the noblest families
at Rome. In
politics he belonged to the party of Sulla, to which indeed in its less
prosperous days he had rendered good service. Since its restoration to power he
had lived much at Rome,
evidently considering himself, as indeed he had the right to do, to be
perfectly safe from any danger of proscription. But he was wealthy, and he had
among his own kinsfolk enemies who desired and who
would profit by his death. One of these, a certain Titus Roscius,
surnamed Magnus, was at the time of the murder residing at Rome; the other, who was known as Capito, was at home at Ameria.
The murder was committed about seven o'clock in the evening. A
messenger immediately left Rome
with the news, and made such haste to Ameria that he
reached the place before dawn the next day. Strangely enough he went to
the house not of the murdered man's son, who was living at Ameria
in charge of his farms, but of the hostile kinsman Capito.
Three days afterwards Capito and Magnus made their
way to the camp of Sulla (he was besieging Volaterrae,
another Etrurian town). They had an interview with
one Chrysogonus, a Greek freedman of the Dictator,
and explained to him how rich a prey they could secure if he would only help
them. The deceased, it seems, had left a large sum of money and thirteen
valuable farms, nearly all of them running down to the Tiber.
And the son, the lawful heir, could easily be got out of the way. Roscius was a well-known and a popular man, yet no outcry
had followed his disappearance. With the son, a simple farmer, ignorant of
affairs, and wholly unknown to Rome,
it would be easy to deal. Ultimately the three entered into alliance. The
proscription was to be revived, so to speak, to take in this particular case,
and the name of Roscius was included in the list of
the condemned. All his wealth was treated as the property of the proscribed,
and was sold by auction. It was purchased by Chrysogonus.
The real value was between fifty and sixty thousand pounds. The price paid was
something less than eighteen pounds. Three of the finest farms were at once
handed over to Capito as his share of the spoil.
Magnus acted as the agent of Chrysogonus for the
remainder. He took possession of the house in which Roscius
the younger was living, laid his hands on all its contents, among which was a
considerable sum of money, and drove out the unfortunate young man in an
absolutely penniless condition.
These proceedings excited great indignation at Ameria. The local senate passed a resolution to the effect
that the committee of ten should proceed to Sulla's camp and put him in
possession of the facts, with the object of removing the name of the father
from the list of the proscribed, and reinstating the son in his inheritance.
The ten proceeded accordingly to the camp, but Chrysogonus
cajoled and over-reached them. It was represented to them by persons of high
position that there was no need to trouble Sulla with the affair. The name
should be removed from the list; the property should be restored. Capito, who was one of the ten, added his personal
assurance to the same effect, and the deputation, satisfied that their object
had been attained, returned to Ameria. There was of
course no intention of fulfilling the promises thus made. The first idea of the
trio was to deal with the son as they had dealt with the father. Some hint of
this purpose was conveyed to him, and he fled to Rome, where he was hospitably entertained by Caecilia, a wealthy lady of the family of Metellus, and therefore related to Sulla's wife, who indeed
bore the same name. As he was now safe from violence, it was resolved to take
the audacious step of accusing him of the murder of his father. Outrageous as
it seems, the plan held out some promise of success. The accused was a man of
singularly reserved character, rough and boorish in manner, and with no
thoughts beyond the rustic occupations to which his life was devoted. His
father, on the other hand, had been a man of genial temper, who spent much of
his time among the polished circles of the Capitol. If there was no positive
estrangement between them, there was a great discrepancy of tastes, and
probably very little intercourse. This it would be easy to exaggerate into
something like a plausible charge, especially under the circumstances of the
case. It was beyond doubt that many murders closely resembling the murder of Roscius had been committed during the past year, committed
some of them by sons. This was the first time that an alleged culprit was
brought to trial, and it was probable that the jury would be inclined to
severity. In any case, and whatever the evidence, it was hoped that the verdict
would not be such as to imply the guilt of a favorite of Sulla. He was the
person who would profit most by the condemnation of the accused, and it was
hoped that he would take the necessary means to secure it.
The friends of the father were satisfied of the innocence of
the son, and they exerted themselves to secure for him an efficient defense.
Sulla was so much dreaded that none of the more conspicuous orators of the time
were willing to undertake the task. Cicero,
however, had the courage which they wanted; and his speech, probably little
altered from the form in which he delivered it, remains.
It was a horrible crime of which his client was accused, and
the punishment the most awful known to the Roman law. The face of the guilty
man was covered with a wolf's skin, as being one who was not worthy to see the
light; shoes of wood were put upon his feet that they might not touch the
earth. He was then thrust into a sack of leather, and with him four animals
which were supposed to symbolize all that was most hideous and depraved--the
dog, a common object of contempt; the cock, proverbial for its want of all
filial affection; the poisonous viper; and the ape, which was the base
imitation of man. In this strange company he was thrown into the nearest river
or sea.
Cicero
begins by explaining why he had undertaken a case which his elders and betters
had declined. It was not because he was bolder, but because he was more insignificant
than they, and could speak with impunity when they could not choose but be
silent. He then gives the facts in detail, the murder of Roscius,
the seizure of his property, the fruitless deputation to Sulla, the flight of
the son to Rome,
and the audacious resolve of his enemies to indict him for parricide. They had
murdered his father, they had robbed him of his patrimony, and now they accused
him--of what crime? Surely of nothing else than the crime of
having escaped their attack. The thing reminded him of the story of Fimbria and Scaevola. Fimbria, an absolute madman, as was allowed by all who were
not mad themselves, got some ruffian to stab Scaevola
at the funeral of Marius. He was stabbed but not killed. When Fimbria found that he was likely to live, he indicted him.
For what do you indict a man so blameless? asked some
one. For what? for not
allowing himself to be stabbed to the heart. This is exactly why the
confederates have indicted Roscius. His crime has
been of escaping from their hands. "Roscius
killed his father," you say. "A young man, I suppose, led away by
worthless companions." Not so; he is more than forty years of age.
"Extravagance and debt drove him to it." No; you say yourself that he
never goes to an entertainment, and he certainly owes nothing.
"Well," you say, "his father disliked him." Why did he
dislike him? "That," you reply, "I cannot say;
but he certainly kept one son with him, and left this Roscius
to look after his farms." Surely this is a strange punishment, to
give him the charge of so fine an estate. "But," you repeat, "he kept his other with him." "Now listen to
me," cries Cicero, turning with savage
sarcasm to the prosecutor, "Providence
never allowed you to know who your father was. Still you have read books. Do
you remember in Caecilius' play how the father had
two sons, and kept one with him and left the other in the country? and do you remember that the one who lived with him was not
really his son, the other was true-born, and yet it was the true-born who lived
in the country? And is it such a disgrace to live in the country? It is well
that you did not live in old times when they took a Dictator from the plow;
when the men who made Rome
what it is cultivated their own land, but did not covet the land of others.
'Ah! but,' you say, 'the father intended to disinherit
him.' Why? 'I cannot say.' Did he disinherit him? 'No, he did not.' Who stopped
him? 'Well, he was thinking of it.' To whom did he say so? 'To
no one.' Surely," cries Cicero,
"this is to abuse the laws and justice and your dignity in the basest and
most wanton way, to make charges which he not only cannot but does not even
attempt to establish."
Shortly after comes a lively description of the prosecutor's
demeanor. "It was really worth while, if you observed, gentlemen, the
man's utter indifference as he was conducting his case. I take it that when he
saw who was sitting on these benches, he asked whether such an
one or such an one was engaged for the defense. Of me he never thought, for I
had never spoken before in a criminal case. When he found that none of the
usual speakers were concerned in it, he became so careless that when the humor
took him, he sat down, then walked about, sometimes called a servant, to give
him orders, I suppose, for dinner, and certainly treated this court in which
you are sitting as if it were an absolute solitude. At last he brought his
speech to an end. I rose to reply. He could be seen to breathe again that it
was I and no one else. I noticed, gentlemen, that he
continued to laugh and be inattentive till I mentioned Chrysogonus.
As soon as I got to him my friend roused himself and was evidently astonished.
I saw what had touched him, and repeated the name a second time, and a third.
From that time men have never ceased to run briskly backwards and forwards, to
tell Chrysogonus, I suppose, that there was some one
in the country who ventured to oppose his pleasure, that the case was being
pleaded otherwise than as he imagined it would be; that the sham sale of goods
was being exposed, the confederacy grievously handled, his popularity and power
disregarded, that the people were giving their whole attention to the cause,
and that the common opinion was that the transaction generally was disgraceful.
"Then," continued the speaker, "this charge
of parricide, so monstrous is the crime, must have the very strongest evidence
to support it. There was a case at Tarracina of a man
being found murdered in the chamber where he was sleeping, his two sons, both
young men, being in the same room. No one could be found, either slave or free
man, who seemed likely to have done the deed; and as the two sons, grown up as
they were, declared that they knew nothing about it, they were indicted for
parricide. What could be so suspicious? Suspicious, do I say? Nay, worse. That neither knew any thing about it? That any
one had ventured into that chamber at the very time when there were in it two
young men who would certainly perceive and defeat the attempt? Yet, because it
was proved to the jury that the young men had been found fast asleep, with the
door wide open, they were acquitted. It was thought incredible that men who had
just committed so monstrous a crime could possibly sleep. Why, Solon, the
wisest of all legislators, drawing up his code of laws, provided no punishment
for this crime; and when he was asked the reason replied that he believed that
no one would ever commit it. To provide a punishment would be to suggest rather
than prevent. Our own ancestors provided indeed a punishment, but it was of the
strangest kind, showing how strange, how monstrous they thought the crime. And
what evidence do you bring forward? The man was not at Rome. That is proved. There-fore he must have
done it, if he did it at all, by the hands of others. Who were these others?
Were they free men or slaves? If they were free men where did they come from,
where live? How did he hire them? Where is the proof? You haven't a shred of
evidence, and yet you accuse him of parricide. And if they were slaves, where,
again I ask, are they? There _were_ two slaves who saw the deed; but they
belonged to the confederate not to the accused. Why do you not produce them? Purely because they would prove your guilt.
"It is there indeed that we find the real truth of the
matter. It was the maxim of a famous lawyer, Ask: _who profited by the deed_? I
ask it now. It was Magnus who profited. He was poor before, and now he is rich.
And then he was in Rome
at the time of the murder; and he was familiar with assassins. Remember too the
strange speed with which he sent the news to Ameria,
and sent it, not to the son, as one might expect, but to Capito
his accomplice; for that he was an accomplice is evident enough. What else could he be when he so cheated the deputation that went
to Sulla at Volaterrae?"
Cicero then turned to Chrysogonus, and attacked him with a boldness which is
surprising, when we remember how high he stood in the favor of the absolute
master of Rome, "See how he comes down from
his fine mansion on the Palatine. Yes, and he
has for his own enjoyment a delightful retreat in the suburbs, and many an
estate besides, and not one of them but is both handsome and conveniently near.
His house is crowded with ware of Corinth and Delos, among them that famous self-acting cooking
apparatus, which he lately bought at a price so high that the passers-by, when
they heard the clerk call out the highest bid, supposed that it must be a farm
which was being sold. And what quantities, think you, he has of embossed plate,
and coverlets of purple, and pictures, and statues, and colored marbles! Such
quantities, I tell you, as scarce could be piled together in one mansion in a
time of tumult and rapine from many wealthy establishments. And his
household--why should I describe how many it numbers, and how varied are its
accomplishments? I do not speak of ordinary domestics, the cook, the baker, the
litter-bearer. Why, for the mere enjoyment of his ears he has such a multitude
of men that the whole neighborhood echoes again with the daily music of
singers, and harp-players, and flute-players, and with the uproar of his
nightly banquets. What daily expenses, what extravagance, as you well know,
gentlemen, there must be in such a life as this! how
costly must be these banquets! Creditable banquets, indeed, held in such a
house--a house, do I say, and not a manufactory of wickedness, a place of
entertainment for every kind of crime? And as for the man himself--you see,
gentlemen, how he bustles every where about the forum, with his hair
fashionably arranged and dripping with perfumes; what a crowd of citizens, yes,
of citizens, follow him; you see how he looks down upon every one, thinks no
one can be compared to himself, fancies himself the one rich and powerful man
in Rome?"
The jury seems to have caught the contagion of courage from
the advocate. They acquitted the accused. It is not known whether he ever
recovered his property. But as Sulla retired from power in the following year,
and died the year after, we may hope that the favorites and the villains whom he
had sheltered were compelled to disgorge some at least of their gains.
CHAPTER IV.
A ROMAN MAGISTRATE.
Of all the base creatures who found a profit in the
massacres and plunderings which Sulla commanded or
permitted, not one was baser than Caius Verres. The
crimes that he committed would be beyond our belief if it were not for the fact
that he never denied them. He betrayed his friends, he perverted justice, he
plundered a temple with as little scruple as he plundered a private house, he
murdered a citizen as boldly as he murdered a foreigner; in fact, he was the
most audacious, the most cruel, the most shameless of men. And yet he rose to
high office at home and abroad, and had it not been for the courage, sagacity,
and eloquence of one man, he might have risen to the very highest. What Roman
citizens had sometimes, and Roman subjects, it is to be feared, very often to
endure may be seen from the picture which we are enabled to draw of a _Roman
magistrate_.
Roman politicians began public life as quaestors.
(A quaestor was an official who managed money matters
for higher magistrates. Every governor of a province had one or more quaestors under him. They were elected at Rome, and their posts were assigned to them
by lot.) Verres was quaestor
in Gaul and embezzled the public money; he was quaestor
in Cilicia with Dolabella,
a like-minded governor, and diligently used his opportunity. This time it was
not money only, but works of art, on which he laid his hands; and in these the
great cities, whether in Asia or in Europe,
were still rich. The most audacious, perhaps, of these robberies was
perpetrated in the island
of Delos. Delos was known
all over the world as the island
of Apollo. The legend was
that it was the birthplace of the god. None of his shrines was more frequented
or more famous. Verres was indifferent to such
considerations. He stripped the temple of its finest statues, and loaded a
merchant ship which he had hired with the booty. But this time he was not lucky
enough to secure it. The islanders, though they had discovered the theft, did
not, indeed, venture to complain. They thought it was the doing of the
governor, and a governor, though his proceedings might be impeached after his
term of office, was not a person with whom it was safe to remonstrate. But a
terrible storm suddenly burst upon the island. The governor's departure was
delayed. To set sail in such weather was out of the question. The sea was
indeed so high that the town became scarcely habitable. Then Verres' ship was wrecked, and the statues were found cast
upon the shore. The governor ordered them to be replaced in the temple, and the
storm subsided as suddenly as it had arisen.
On his return to Rome Dolabella
was impeached for extortion. With characteristic baseness Verres
gave evidence against him, evidence so convincing as to cause a verdict of
guilty. But he thus secured his own gains, and these he used so profusely in
the purchase of votes that two or three years afterwards he was elected
praetor. The praetors performed various functions which were assigned to them
by lot. Chance, or it may possibly have been contrivance, gave to Verres the most considerable of them all. He was made
"Praetor of the City;" that is, a judge before whom a certain class
of very important causes were tried. Of course he showed himself scandalously
unjust. One instance of his proceedings may suffice.
A certain Junius had made a
contract for keeping the temple
of Castor in repair. When
Verres came into office he had died, leaving a son
under age. There had been some neglect, due probably to the troubles of the
times, in seeing that the contracts had been duly executed, and the Senate
passed a resolution that Verres and one of his
fellow-praetors should see to the matter. The temple of Castor
came under review like the others, and Verres,
knowing that the original contractor was dead, inquired who was
the responsible person. When he heard of the son under age he recognized
at once a golden opportunity. It was one of the maxims which he had laid down
for his own guidance, and which he had even been wont to give out for the
benefit of his friends, that much profit might be made out of the property of
wards. It had been arranged that the guardian of the young Junius
should take the contract into his own hands, and, as the temple was in
excellent repair, there was no difficulty in the way. Verres
summoned the guardian to appear before him. "Is there any thing," he
asked, "that your ward has not made good, and which we ought to require of
him?" "No," said he, "every thing is quite right; all the
statues and offerings are there, and the fabric is in excellent repair."
From the praetor's point of view this was not satisfactory; and he determined
on a personal visit. Accordingly he went to the temple, and inspected it. The
ceiling was excellent; the whole building in the best repair. "What is to
be done?" he asked of one of his satellites. "Well," said the
man, "there is nothing for you to meddle with here, except possibly to
require that the columns should be restored to the perpendicular."
"Restored to the perpendicular? what do you
mean?" said Verres, who knew nothing of
architecture. It was explained to him that it very seldom happened that a
column was absolutely true to the perpendicular. "Very good," said Verres; "we will have the columns made
perpendicular." Notice accordingly was sent to the lad's guardians.
Disturbed at the prospect of indefinite loss to their ward's property, they
sought an interview with Verres. One of the noble family of Marcellus waited upon him, and remonstrated
against the iniquity of the proceeding. The remonstrance was in vain. The
praetor showed no signs of relenting. There yet remained one way, a way only
too well known to all who had to deal with him, of obtaining their object.
Application must be made to his mistress (a Greek freedwoman of the name of Chelidon or "The Swallow"). If she could be
induced to take an interest in the case something might yet be done. Degrading
as such a course must have been to men of rank and honor, they resolved, in the
inte