held. On the 19th of November Milo arrived on the _campus_ before midnight with a large company. Clodius, though he had picked gangs of runaway slaves, did not venture into the _campus_. Milo stopped there till midday,[412] to everybody's great delight and his own infinite credit: the movement of the three brethren[413] ended in their own disgrace; their violence was crushed, their madness made ridiculous.
However, Metellus demands that the obstructive notice should be served on him next day in the forum: "there was no need to come to the _campus_ before daybreak: he would be in the _comitium_ at the first hour of the day."[414] Accordingly, on the 20th Milo came to the forum before sunrise. Metellus at the first sign of dawn was stealthily hurrying to the _campus_, I had almost said by by-lanes: Milo catches our friend up "between the groves"[415] and serves his notice. The latter returned greeted with loud and insulting remarks by Q. Flaccus. The 21st was a market day.[416] For two days no public meeting. I am writing this letter on the 23rd at three o'clock in the morning. Milo is already in possession of the _campus_. The candidate Marcellus[417] is snoring so loud that I can hear him next door. I am told that Clodius's vestibule is completely deserted: there are a few ragged fellows there and a canvas lantern.[418] His party complains that I am the adviser of the whole business: they little know the courage and wisdom of that hero!
His gallantry is astonishing. Some recent instances of his superhuman excellence I pass over; but the upshot is this: I don't think the election will take place. I think Publius will be brought to trial by Milo--unless he is killed first. If he once puts himself in his way in a riot, I can see that he will be killed by Milo himself. The latter has no scruple about doing it; he avows his intention; he isn't at all afraid of what happened to me, for _he_ will never listen to the advice of a jealous and faithless friend, nor trust a feeble aristocrat. In spirit, at any rate, I am as vigorous as in my zenith, or even more so; in regard to money I am crippled. However, the liberality of my brother I have, in spite of his protests, repaid (as the state of my finances compelled) by the aid of my friends, that I might not be drained quite dry myself. What line of policy to adopt in regard to my position as a whole, I cannot decide in your absence: wherefore make haste to town.
[Footnote 400: See last letter. The _porticus Catuli_ had been, at any rate, partly demolished by Clodius to make way for his larger scheme of building, which was to take in part of Cicero's "site." See _pro Cæl._ §79.]
[Footnote 401: Next door to Cicero's own house.]
[Footnote 402: He would avoid prosecution _de vi_ by getting elected to the ædileship for B.C. 56, for actual magistrates were rarely prosecuted; but he, in this case, actually avoided it by getting a consul and tribune to forbid it by edict (_pro Sest._ § 89).]
[Footnote 403: _Designatorem._ This may mean (1) an official who shewed people to their places in the theatre; (2) an undertaker's man, who marshalled funerals. To the latter office a certain _infamia_ was attached. We know nothing more of Decimus (see _pro Domo_, § 50).
Gellius was an eques and a stepson of L. Marcius Philippus. He afterwards gave evidence against Sestius for _vis_ (see _pro Sest._ § 110). Cicero calls him the mover of all seditions (_in Vatin._ § 4), and one of Clodius's gang (_de Har. Resp._ § 59). See next letter.]
40.]
[Footnote 405: Lit. "made all Catilines _Acidini_." Acidinus was the cognomen of several distinguished men. In _Leg. Agr._ ii. § 64, Cicero classes the _Acidini_ among men "respectable not only for the public offices they had held, and for their services to the state, but also for the noble way in which they had endured poverty." There does not, however, seem any very good reason known for their becoming proverbial as the antithesis to revolutionaries.]
[Footnote 406: A slope of the Palatine. Milo's other house (p. 196).]
[Footnote 407: P. Cornelius Sulla, nephew of the dictator. Cicero defended him in B.C. 62, but he had taken the part of Clodius in the time of Cicero's exile.]
[Footnote 408: Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus, the consul-designate for the next year. In that capacity he would be called on for his _sententia_ first.]
[Footnote 409: Q. Cæcilius Metellus Nepos, the consul. Though he had not opposed Cicero's recall, he stood by his cousin, P. Clodius, in regard to the threatened prosecution. Appius is Appius Claudius, brother of P.
Clodius.]
[Footnote 410: P. Sestius, the tribune favourable to Cicero, afterwards defended by him.]
[Footnote 411: Mr. Purser's reading of _nisi anteferret_ before _proscripsit_ seems to me to darken the passage. What happened was this.
Marcellinus's _sententia_ was never put to the vote, because Metellus, Appius, and Hortensius (Cicero seems to mean him) talked out the sitting. Accordingly, Marcellinus published it, _i.e._, put it up outside the Curia to be read: and under it he (or some other magistrate whose name has dropped out of the text) put a notice that he was going to "watch the sky" all the _dies comitiales_, so as to prevent the election being held. But this had been rendered inoperative by Clodius's amendment of the _lex Ælia Fufia_ (see 2 _Phil._ § 81)--or at any rate of doubtful validity--and, accordingly, the only thing left was the _obnuntiatio_ by a magistrate, which Milo proceeded to make. The rule, however was that such _obnuntiatio_ must be made before the _comitia_ were begun (2 _Phil. ib._), which again could not begin till sunrise.
Hence Milo's early visit to the _campus_. For the meaning of _proposita_ see Letter XLVII.]
[Footnote 412: After which the _comitia_ could not be begun.]
[Footnote 413: P. Clodius, his brother Appius, and his _cousin_ Metellus Nepos.]
[Footnote 414: Metellus means that he shall take the necessary auspices for the _comitia_ in the _comitium_, before going to the _campus_ to take the votes.]
[Footnote 415: Generally called _inter duos lucos_, the road down the Capitolium towards the Campus Martius, originally so called as being between the two heads of the mountain. It was the spot traditionally assigned to the "asylum" of Romulus.]
[Footnote 416: On the _nundinæ_ and the next day no _comitia_ and no meeting of the senate could be held.]
[Footnote 417: Candidate for the ædileship, of whom we know nothing.]
[Footnote 418: Apparently a poor lantern, whose sides were made of canvas instead of horn.]
XCII (Q FR II, 1) TO HIS BROTHER QUINTUS (IN SARDINIA[419]) ROME (10 DECEMBER) The letter which you have already read I had sent off in the morning.
But Licinius was polite enough to call on me in the evening after the senate had risen, that, in case of any business having been done there, I might, if I thought good, write an account of it to you. The senate was fuller than I had thought possible in the month of December just before the holidays. Of us consulars there were P. Servilius, M.
Lucullus, Lepidus, Volcatius, Glabrio: the two consuls-designate; the prætors. We were a really full house: two hundred in all.[420] Lupus had excited some interest.[421] He raised the question of the Campanian land in considerable detail. He was listened to in profound silence. You are not unaware what material that subject affords. He omitted none of the points which I had made in this business.[422] There were some sharp thrusts at Cæsar, some denunciations of Gellius, some appeals to the absent Pompey. After concluding his speech at a late hour, he said that he would not ask for our votes lest he might burden us with a personal controversy; he quite understood the sentiments of the senate from the denunciations of past times and the silence on the present occasion.
Milo spoke. Lupus begins the formula of dismissal,[423] when Marcellinus says: "Don't infer from our silence, Lupus, what we approve or disapprove of at this particular time. As far as I am concerned, and I think it is the same with the rest, I am only silent because I do not think it suitable that the case of the Campanian land should be debated in Pompey's absence." Then Lupus said that he would not detain the senate.[423] Racilius rose and began bringing before the house the case of the proposed prosecutions. He calls upon Marcellinus, of course, first;[424] who, after complaining in serious tones of the Clodian incendiaries, massacres, and stonings, proposed a resolution that "Clodius himself should, under the superintendence of the prætor urbanus, have his jury allotted to him; that the elections should be held only when the allotment of jurors[425] had been completed; that whoever stopped the trials would be acting against the interests of the state."[426] The proposal having been received with warm approval, Gaius Cato[427]--as did also Cassius--spoke against it, with very emphatic murmurs of disapprobation on the part of the senate, when he proposed to hold the elections before the trials. Philippus supported Lentulus.[428] After that Racilius called on me first of the unofficial senators for my opinion.[429] I made a long speech upon the whole story of P. Clodius's mad proceedings and murderous violence: I impeached him as though he were on his trial, amidst frequent murmurs of approbation from the whole senate. My speech was praised at considerable length, and, by Hercules!
with no little oratorical skill by Antistius Vetus, who also supported the priority of the legal proceedings, and declared that he should consider it of the first importance. The senators were crossing the floor in support of this view,[430] when Clodius, being called on, began trying to talk out the sitting. He spoke in furious terms of having been attacked by Racilius in an unreasonable and discourteous manner. Then his roughs on the Græcostasis[431] and the steps of the house suddenly raised a pretty loud shout, in wrath, I suppose, against Q. Sextilius and the other friends of Milo. At this sudden alarm we broke up with loud expressions of indignation on all sides. Here are the transactions of one day for you: the rest, I think, will be put off to January. Of all the tribunes I think Racilius is by far the best: Antistius also seems likely to be friendly to me: Plancius, of course, is wholly ours.
Pray, if you love me, be careful and cautious about sailing in December.
[Footnote 419: Quintus Cicero was in Sardinia as Pompey's _legatus_ as superintendent of the corn-supply, to which office he had been appointed in August. The letter is written not earlier than the 10th of December, for the new tribunes for B.C. 56 have come into office, and not later than the 16th, because on the 17th the Saturnalia began. Perhaps as the senate is summoned and presided over by Lupus, it is on the 10th, the day of his entrance upon office.]
[Footnote 420: "Full," that is, for the time of year. A "full house" is elsewhere mentioned as between three and four hundred.]
[Footnote 421: P. Rutilius Lupus, one of the new tribunes.]
[Footnote 422: This refers to Cicero's attempts to exempt the _ager publicus_ in Campania from being divided (see Letter XXIV, p. 55); and not only to his speeches against Rullus. It was because Cæsar disregarded the ancient exception of this land from such distribution that Cicero opposed his bill, and refused to serve on the commission.]
[Footnote 423: _Nihil vos moramur_ were the words used by the presiding magistrate, indicating that he had no more business to bring before the senate. If no one said anything, the senate was dismissed; but any magistrate, or magistrate-designate, could speak, and so continue the sitting up to nightfall, when the house stood adjourned.]
[Footnote 424: Because consul-designate. L. Racilius, one of the new tribunes.]
[Footnote 425: The _sortitio iudicum_ was performed by the prætor drawing out the required number of names from the urn, which contained the names of all liable to serve. The accused could, however, challenge a certain number, and the prætor had then to draw others.]
[Footnote 426: The formula whereby the senate declared its opinion that so and so was guilty of treason. It had no legal force, but the magistrates might, and sometimes did, act on it.]
[Footnote 427: C. Porcius Cato, distant relation of Cato Uticensis, one of the new tribunes.]
[Footnote 428: _I.e._, Marcellinus (Cn. Cornelius Lentulus).]
[Footnote 429: The senators not in office only spoke when called on (_rogati_). The consuls-designate (if there were any) were always called first, and then the consulars in order. To be called _first_ was a subject of ambition, and an opportunity for the presiding magistrate to pay a compliment or the reverse.]
[Footnote 430: They went and sat or stood near the speaker they wished to support. It was not, however, a formal division till the speeches ended, and the presiding magistrate counted. Still, it made the division easier.]
[Footnote 431: A platform outside the senate-house, where representatives originally of Greek and then of other states were placed. It was apparently possible to hear, or partly hear, the debates from it. It was a _locus substructus_ (Varro, _L. L._ v. 155). There is no evidence that it was a building to lodge ambassadors in, as Prof.
Tyrrell says.]
XCIII (F VII, 26) TO M. FADIUS GALLUS (AT ROME) Having been suffering for nine days past from a severe disorder of the bowels, and being unable to convince those who desired my services that I was ill because I had no fever, I fled to my Tusculan villa, after having, in fact, observed for two days so strict a fast as not even to drink a drop of water. Accordingly, being thoroughly reduced by weakness and hunger, I was more in want of your services than I thought mine could be required by you. For myself, while shrinking from all illnesses, I especially shrink from that in regard to which the Stoics attack your friend Epicurus for saying that "he suffered from strangury and pains in the bowels"--the latter of which complaints they attribute to gluttony, the former to a still graver indulgence. I had been really much afraid of dysentery. But either the change of residence, or the mere relaxation of anxiety, or perhaps the natural abatement of the complaint from lapse of time, seems to me to have done me good. However, to prevent your wondering how this came about, or in what manner I let myself in for it, I must tell you that the sumptuary law, supposed to have introduced plain living, was the origin of my misfortune. For whilst your epicures wish to bring into fashion the products of the earth, which are not forbidden by the law, they flavour mushrooms, _petits choux_, and every kind of pot-herb so as to make them the most tempting dishes possible.[433] Having fallen a victim to these in the augural banquet at the house of Lentulus, I was seized with a violent diarrhœa, which, I think, has been checked to-day for the first time.
And so I, who abstain from oysters and lampreys without any difficulty, have been beguiled by beet and mallows. Henceforth, therefore, I shall be more cautious. Yet, having heard of it from Anicius[434]--for he saw me turning sick--you had every reason not only for sending to inquire, but even for coming to see me. I am thinking of remaining here till I am thoroughly restored, for I have lost both strength and flesh. However, if I can once get completely rid of my complaint, I shall, I hope, easily recover these.
[Footnote 432: The year of this letter has been inferred from the mention of Lentulus's augural banquet. For P. Cornelius Lentulus Spinther, son of the consul of B.C. 57, was in this year elected into the college of augurs. Yet as we know that Cicero's Tusculan villa was dismantled by Clodius, and was advertised for sale (though not sold), it seems rather extraordinary that Cicero should have gone there for his health. The _Fadii Galli_ were a family of Cicero's native place, Arpinum.]
[Footnote 433: There were several sumptuary laws. Those which may possibly be referred to here are (1) the _lex Licinia_ (? B.C. 103), which defined certain foods as illegal at banquets, but excepted _quod ex terra vite arbore ve sit natum_ (Macrobius, _Sat._ iii. 17, 9; Gell.
ii. 24, 7); (2) the _lex Æmilia_ (B.C. 68), which also defined both the quantity and quality of food allowable at banquets (Gell. ii. 24, 12).]
[Footnote 434: C. Anicius, a senator and intimate friend of Cicero's.]
XCIV (F I, I) [Sidenote: B.C. 56. Coss., Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus, L.
Marcius Philippus.]
In the year B.C. 56 the growing differences between the triumvirs were temporarily composed at the meeting at Luca, and Cicero made up his mind that the only course for him to pursue was to attach himself to them, as the party of the _boni_ had not, as he hoped, taken advantage of those differences to attach Pompey to themselves as a leader against Cæsar. His recantation is indicated in the speeches _de Provinciis Consularibus_ and _pro Balbo_, in which he practically supports part, at least, of the arrangements of Luca.
TO P. LENTULUS SPINTHER[435] (IN CILICIA) ROME, 13 JANUARY Whatever attention or affection I may shew you, though it may seem sufficient in the eyes of others, can never seem sufficient in my own.
For such has been the magnitude of your services to me that, inasmuch as you never rested till my affair was brought to a conclusion, while I cannot effect the same in your cause,[436] I regard my life as a burden.
The difficulties are these. The king's agent, Hammonius, is openly attacking us by bribery. The business is being carried out by means of the same money-lenders as it was when you were in town. Such people as wish it done for the king's sake--and they are few--are all for intrusting the business to Pompey. The senate supports the trumped-up religious scruple, not from any respect to religion, but from ill-feeling towards him, and disgust at the king's outrageous bribery. I never cease advising and instigating Pompey--even frankly finding fault with and admonishing him--to avoid what would be a most discreditable imputation.[437] But he really leaves no room for either entreaties or admonitions from me. For, whether in everyday conversation or in the senate, no one could support your cause with greater eloquence, seriousness, zeal, and energy than he has done, testifying in the highest terms to your services to himself and his affection for you.
Marcellinus, you know, is incensed with his flute-playing majesty.[438] In everything, saving and excepting this case of the king, he professes the intention of being your champion. We take what he gives: nothing can move him from his motion as to the religious difficulty, which he made up his mind to bring, and has, in fact, brought several times before the senate. The debate up to the Ides (for I am writing early in the morning of the Ides[439]) has been as follows: Hortensius and I and Lucullus voted for yielding to the religious scruple as far as concerned the army,[440] for otherwise there was no possibility of getting the matter through, but, in accordance with the decree already passed on your own motion, were for directing you to restore the king, "so far as you may do so without detriment to the state": so that while the religious difficulty prohibits the employment of an army, the senate might still retain you as the person authorized. Crassus votes for sending three legates, not excluding Pompey: for he would allow them to be selected even from such as are at present in possession of _imperium_.[441] Bibulus is for three legates selected from men without _imperium_. The other consulars agree with the latter, except Servilius, who says that he ought not to be restored at all: and Volcatius, who on the motion of Lupus votes for giving the business to Pompey: and Afranius, who agrees with Volcatius. This last fact increases the suspicion as to Pompey's wishes: for it was noticed that Pompey's intimates agreed with Volcatius. We are in a very great difficulty: the day seems going against us. The notorious colloguing and eagerness of Libo and Hypsæus, and the earnestness displayed by Pompey's intimates, have produced an impression that Pompey desires it; and those who don't want him to have it are at the same time annoyed with your having put power into his hands.[442] I have the less influence in the case because I am under an obligation to you. Moreover, whatever influence I might have had is extinguished by the idea people entertain as to Pompey's wishes, for they think they are gratifying him. We are in much the same position as we were long before your departure: now, as then, the sore has been fomented secretly by the king himself and by the friends and intimates of Pompey, and then openly irritated by the consulars, till the popular prejudice has been excited to the highest pitch. All the world shall recognize my loyalty, and your friends on the spot shall see my affection for you though you are absent. If there were any good faith in those most bound to shew it, we should be in no difficulty at all.
[Footnote 435: Consul of B.C. 57, who had gone at the end of his consulship to be governor of Cilicia.]
[Footnote 436: When Ptolemy Auletes first appealed to the senate (B.C.
57) to restore him to the throne of Egypt, it appears that a resolution was passed authorizing the proconsul of Cilicia to do so; but as Pompey wished to have the business, the senate found itself in a difficulty, not wishing to put him in military command, or daring to offend him by an open refusal (Dio, xxxix. 12). The tribune C. Cato found up a Sibylline oracle forbidding the employment of an army for the purpose, which served the senate as a decent excuse. The commission to Lentulus was eventually withdrawn by an _auctoritas senatus_, and Lentulus did not venture to do it. Ptolemy, finding that he could not succeed in getting Pompey commissioned, retired to Ephesus, and afterwards succeeded by an enormous bribe in inducing Gabinius, the proconsul of Syria, to do it (B.C. 55).]
[Footnote 437: Of having been induced by greed or ambition to undertake the restoration of Ptolemy.]
[Footnote 438: Reading _tibicini_ for the unmeaning _tibi_. It is not certain, but it makes good sense. Ptolemy was called _Auletes_ (flute-player), of which the Latin _tibicen_ is a translation, meant, no doubt, somewhat jocosely.]
[Footnote 439: _I.e._, before going to the senate on the Ides of January (13th). See next letter.]
[Footnote 440: The Sibylline oracle forbade restoring the king "with a multitude."]
[Footnote 441: Pompey had at this time _imperium_ as _curator annonæ_.]
[Footnote 442: Because it was on Lentulus's motion that Pompey had been made _curator annonæ_, and so in possession of _imperium_ with naval and military forces.]
XCV (F I, 2) TO P. LENTULUS SPINTHER (IN CILICIA) ROME, 15 JANUARY Nothing was done on the 13th of January in the senate, because the day was to a great extent spent in an altercation between the consul Lentulus and the tribune Caninius. On that day I also spoke at considerable length, and thought that I made a very great impression on the senate by dwelling on your affection for the house. Accordingly, next day we resolved that we would deliver our opinions briefly: for it appeared to us that the feelings of the senate had been softened towards us--the result not only of my speech, but of my personal appeal and application to individual senators. Accordingly, the first proposition, that of Bibulus, having been delivered, that three legates should restore the king: the second, that of Hortensius, that you should restore him without an army: the third, that of Volcatius, that Pompey should do it, a demand was made that the proposal of Bibulus should be taken in two parts.[443] As far as he dealt with the religious difficulty--a point which was now past being opposed--his motion was carried; his proposition as to three legates was defeated by a large majority. The next was the proposition of Hortensius. Thereupon the tribune Lupus, on the ground that he had himself made a proposal about Pompey, starts the contention that he ought to divide the house before the consuls. His speech was received on all sides by loud cries of "No": for it was both unfair and unprecedented. The consuls would not give in, and yet did not oppose with any vigour. Their object was to waste the day, and in that they succeeded:[444] for they saw very well that many times the number would vote for the proposal of Hortensius, although they openly professed their agreement with Volcatius. Large numbers were called upon for their opinion, and that, too, with the assent of the consuls: for they wanted the proposal of Bibulus carried. This dispute was protracted till nightfall, and the senate was dismissed. I happened to be dining with Pompey on that day, and I seized the opportunity--the best I have ever had, for since your departure I have never occupied a more honourable position in the senate than I had on that day--of talking to him in such a way, that I think I induced him to give up every other idea and resolve to support your claims. And, indeed, when I actually hear him talk, I acquit him entirely of all suspicion of personal ambition: but when I regard his intimates of every rank, I perceive, what is no secret to anybody, that this whole business has been long ago corruptly manipulated by a certain coterie, not without the king's own consent and that of his advisers.
I write this on the 15th of January, before daybreak. To-day there is to be a meeting of the senate. We shall maintain, as I hope, our position in the senate as far as it is possible to do so in such an age of perfidy and unfair dealing. As to an appeal to the people on the subject, we have, I think, secured that no proposition can be brought before them without neglect of the auspices or breach of the laws, or, in fine, without downright violence.[445] The day before my writing these words a resolution of the senate on these matters of the most serious character was passed, and though Cato and Caninius vetoed it, it was nevertheless written out.[446] I suppose it has been sent to you. On all other matters I will write and tell you what has been done, whatever it is, and I will see that everything is carried out with the most scrupulous fairness as far as my caution, labour, attention to details, and influence can secure it.
[Footnote 443: The proposal of Bibulus to send "three legates" implied a concession to the Sibylline verse, in not sending "an army." It was therefore to be voted on as two questions--(1) Shall the Sibylline verse be obeyed, and an army not sent? (2) Shall three legates be sent?]
[Footnote 444: That is, the debate went off on the side issue as to who had the prior right of dividing the house. Lupus said _he_ had, because the proposal of Volcatius was really made before the others, _i.e._, in the previous day's debate (see last letter). The consuls were only too glad thus to avoid having the main question brought to a vote, and let this technical point be spun out in a languid debate.]
[Footnote 445: Because they had magistrates ready to stop the _comitia_ by declaring bad omens, and tribunes ready to veto any proposal.]
[Footnote 446: A _senatus consultum_ vetoed by a tribune was written out, with the names of its proposers and backers, and a statement at the end as to the tribunes vetoing it. It was thus on record as an _auctoritas senatus_, "resolution of the senate," not a _senatus consultum_. A perfect specimen is given in Letter CCXXIII. This _auctoritas_ was to the effect that no one was to undertake the restoration. See Letter CXIII.]
XCVI (F I, 3) TO P. LENTULUS SPINTHER (IN CILICIA) ROME (? JANUARY) _M. Cicero presents his compliments to P. Lentulus, proconsul._ Aulus Trebonius, who has important business in your province, both of wide extent and sound, is an intimate friend of mine of many years' standing. As before this he has always, both from his brilliant position and the recommendations of myself and his other friends, enjoyed the highest popularity in the province, so at the present time, trusting to your affection for me and our close ties, he feels sure that this letter of mine will give him a high place in your esteem. That he may not be disappointed in that hope I earnestly beg of you, and I commend to you all his business concerns, his freedmen, agents, and servants; and specially that you will confirm the decrees made by T. Ampius in his regard, and treat him in all respects so as to convince him that my recommendation is no mere ordinary one.[447] [Footnote 447: This is a specimen of the short letter of introduction to a provincial governor which were given almost as a matter of course by men of position at Rome. We shall have many of them in the course of the correspondence: and Cicero elsewhere warns the recipient of such letters not to pay attention to them unless he expressly indicates his wish by some less formal sentence (see Letter CXIV). T. Ampius was the predecessor of Lentulus in Cilicia.]
XCVII (F I, 4) TO P. LENTULUS SPINTHER (IN CILICIA) ROME, JANUARY Though in the senate of the 15th of January we made a most glorious stand, seeing that on the previous day we had defeated the proposal of Bibulus about the three legates, and the only contest left was with the proposal of Volcatius, yet the business was spun out by our opponents by various obstructive tactics. For we were carrying our view in a full senate, in spite of the multifarious devices and inveterate jealousy of those who were for transferring the cause of the king from you to some one else. That day we found Curio very bitterly opposed, Bibulus much more fair, almost friendly even. Caninius and Cato declared that they would not propose any law before the elections. By the _lex Pupia_, as you know, no senate could be held before the 1st of February, nor in fact during the whole of February,[448] unless the business of the legations were finished or adjourned. However, the Roman people are generally of opinion that the pretext of a trumped-up religious scruple has been introduced by your jealous detractors, not so much to hinder you, as to prevent anyone from wishing to go to Alexandria with a view of getting the command of an army. However, everyone thinks that the senate has had a regard for your position. For there is no one that is ignorant of the fact that it was all the doing of your opponents that no division took place: and if they, under the pretext of a regard for the people, but really from the most unprincipled villainy, attempt to carry anything, I have taken very good care that they shall not be able to do so without violating the auspices or the laws, or, in fact, without absolute violence. I don't think I need write a word either about my own zeal or the injurious proceedings of certain persons. For why should I make any display myself--since, if I were even to shed my blood in defence of your position, I should think that I had not covered a tithe of your services to me? Or why complain of the injurious conduct of others, which I cannot do without the deepest pain? I cannot at all pledge myself to you as to the effect of open violence, especially with such feeble magistrates; but, open violence out of the question, I can assure you that you will retain your high position, if the warmest affections both of the senate and the Roman people can secure it to you.
[Footnote 448: _I.e._, no meeting of the senate for ordinary business.
During the month of February the senate usually devoted all its time to hearing and answering deputations from the provinces or foreign states.
The _lex Pupia_ forbade the meeting of the senate on _dies comitiales_, and after the 14th the days in January were all _comitiales_: but another law (_lex Vatinia_) ordered it to meet every day in February for the business of the legations. If this business was concluded or deferred it remained a moot point whether a magistrate was not still bound or, at least, allowed to summon it for other business (_ad Q. Fr._ ii. 13).]
XCVII (F I, 5) TO P. LENTULUS SPINTHER (IN CILICIA) ROME, FEBRUARY Though the first wish of my heart is that my warmest gratitude to you should be recognized first of all by yourself and then by everybody else, yet I am deeply grieved that such a state of things has followed your departure as to give you occasion, in your absence, to test the loyalty and good disposition towards you both of myself and others. That you see and feel that men are shewing the same loyalty in maintaining your position as I experienced in the matter of my restoration, I have understood from your letter. Just when I was depending most securely on my policy, zeal, activity and influence in the matter of the king, there was suddenly sprung on us the abominable bill of Cato's,[449] to hamper all our zeal and withdraw our thoughts from a lesser anxiety to a most serious alarm. However, in a political upset of that kind, though there is nothing that is not a source of terror yet the thing to be chiefly feared is treachery: and Cato, at any rate, whatever happens, we have no hesitation in opposing. As to the business of Alexandria and the cause of the king, I can only promise you thus much, that I will to the utmost of my power satisfy both you, who are absent, and your friends who are here. But I fear the king's cause may either be snatched from our hands or abandoned altogether, and I cannot easily make up my mind which of the two alternatives I would least wish. But if the worst comes to the worst, there is a third alternative, which is not wholly displeasing either to Selicius[450] or myself--namely, that we should not let the matter drop, and yet should not allow the appointment, in spite of our protests, to be transferred to the man to whom it is now regarded as practically transferred.[451] We will take the utmost care not to omit struggling for any point that it seems possible to maintain, and not to present the appearance of defeat if we have in any case failed to maintain it. You must shew your wisdom and greatness of mind by regarding your fame and high position as resting on your virtue, your public services, and the dignity of your character, and by believing that, if the perfidy of certain individuals has deprived you of any of those honours which fortune has lavished on you, it will be more injurious to them than to you. I never let any opportunity slip either of acting or thinking for your interests. I avail myself of the aid of Q. Selicius in everything: nor do I think that there is any one of all your friends either shrewder, or more faithful, or more attached to you.
[Footnote 449: That of the tribune C. Cato for the recall of Lentulus.]