TO M. FADIUS GALLUS (AT ROME)

TUSCULUM[432] (? DECEMBER)

[Sidenote: B.C. 57, aeT. 49]

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, _pet.i.ts 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 diarrha, 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 aemilia_ (B.C. 68), which also defined both the quant.i.ty 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 Caesar. 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

[Sidenote: B.C. 56, aeT. 50]

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 pa.s.sed 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. Cra.s.sus 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 Hypsaeus, 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 pa.s.sed 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, x.x.xix. 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 mult.i.tude."]

[Footnote 441: Pompey had at this time _imperium_ as _curator annonae_.]

[Footnote 442: Because it was on Lentulus's motion that Pompey had been made _curator annonae_, and so in possession of _imperium_ with naval and military forces.]

XCV (F I, 2)

TO P. LENTULUS SPINTHER (IN CILICIA)

ROME, 15 JANUARY

[Sidenote: B.C. 56, aeT. 50]

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 a.s.sent 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 pa.s.sed, 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._

[Sidenote: B.C. 56, aeT. 50]

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]