theilian

Augusta, thank you. And I am waiting for your comments. You promised.

Jan. 60 BC They are such fools that they seem to expect that, though the Republic is lost, their fish-ponds will be safe. There is one man who does take some trouble, but rather, as it seems to me, with more resolution and integrity than with either prudence or intelligence: Cato. July 59 BC Why should I write to you on the Republic in detail? It is utterly ruined; and is, so far, in a worse state than when you left it, that then a despotism seemed to be oppressing it which was popular with the multitude, and though offensive to the loyalists, yet short of actual mischief; but now all on a sudden they have become so universally hated, that I tremble to think what will be the end of it. For we have had experience of those men's resentment and violence, who have ruined everything in their anger against Cato; yet they were employing such slow poisons, that it seemed as though our end might be painless. Now, however, I fear they have been exasperated by the hisses of the crowd, the talk of the respectable classes, and the murmurs of Italy. For my part, I was in hopes, as I often used actually to say to you, that the wheel of the state chariot had made its revolution with scarcely any noise and leaving scarcely any visible rut; and it would have been so, if people could only have waited till the storm had blown over. 54 BC ... Nay, fly hither and look at the empty husks of the real old Roman Republic we used to know. For example, come and see money distributed before the elections tribe by tribe, all in one place openly, see Gabinius acquitted, get the smell of Dictatorship in your nostrils, enjoy the public holiday and the universal free-for-all, behold my equanimity, my amusement, my contempt for Selicius'[1] 10%, and, yes, my delectable rapprochement with Caesar. But the problem with Cicero is that he seems to be open to various interpretationd of events and often persuade himself to see in certain ways, which I think leads him to inconsistencies and gives him reputation for time-serving. So Pompey and later even Caesar are despots destroying the repubilc at one time, but something else at another time. Also although he complains often enough about dying Republic, but still thinks that worst things might pass if general constitution (even if just a shadow of it) remains and there is personnel change, so to speak. What he feared more than anything else though and very consistently was that violent turmoils such as war or Sulla-Marius type of violence would definitely kill the Republic, which turned out to be right.

Actually one might argue that he accepted the death of Republic after Caesar's victory and not to his credit in many people's view. In fact, he has been complaining that Republic was dying ever since first triumvirate. But when a chance seemed to appear with Caesar's death, he took it. There is no evidence that anyone else (including Caesar) had any deeper insight into socio-economic and political problems that Rome faced. IMHO, Principate was simply a result of naked power struggle among individuals.

I absolutely agree with you on Cicero beng close-minded, seeing the malaise of the republic essentially as a matter of personnel problem rather than socio-economical and political crisis. But if you mean Caesarism by 'inevitable', I cannot agree in finding fault with him not accepting it. Moreover, I don't think the rise of Principate was inevitable, but that's another matter. Also I don't see how Cicero is responsible for any lives lost other than 5 Catiline conspirators. Are you suggesting that there would have been no civil war if he had not opposed Antony?

Thank you, Cato. That's something that I'd like to cover, and your information is going to be very useful.

Actually, that is quite possible with Cicero's letters (Or maybe you know that and I'm misunderstanding your words.)

Yes, it would have been best if he retired completely, and not to excuse him this weakness, but how many Romans voluntarily gave up on their dignitas? Not exactly admirable, but it's not as if he pursed such line for his personal hegemony. If relying on Octavian to check Antony, or seeking to bring Pompey and Optimates together means playing all sides, I have nothing to say.

Perseus site is down, going through some kind of repair into next week, which means no update for Cicer letters until then. So in the meantime, I'm planning to begin to work on the website. I plan to put everything on one page so that it's eaiser to search though so far I only put 3 series together. Especially since it's still in early stage, I'd greatly appreciate your input. Do you like my groupings so far? Or should I arrange them differently? I included a few excerpts from speeches here, but I think I'll just link them on the website. I also welcome suggestions for letter entries that were not included in the covered period (I'll come to earlier letters later) I've been using Evelyn Schukburgh's translation, but recently for few part that's unclear or archaic, I used Shackleton's translation (to the extent not violating copyright, I hope). I wonder if it's too jarring or bad idea otherwise. I also plan to change all dates to Shackleton's dating. And of course, the letters are currently full of spelling erros and other problems, but I'll be also correcting them later. Also as I originally began this project for those in HBO board, I skipped a lot of letters and I'm still unsure about the kind of readership I'm aiming for. Any suggestions about this? Since the complete letters are available online (through Perseus and another WONDERFUL SITE I found recently), I think selectiveness and arrangement is important, but I'd appreciate advice on this and all other issues. Lastly, after I'm done with letters, I think I'll expand the website to include other aspects of Cicero. That will be for later, but all suggestons are welcome.

Augusta, there is nothing personal going on (or at least I think so). Constantinus stated his pet peeve about general state of minorities' victim mentaliy, I presume, and I thought I should say something from another perspective. I don't think either of us meant to offend anybody.

I certainly don't mean that suggest that Cicero was braver than Caesar and etc, or that he took more dangerous road than those. Of course, they were all 'braver' or rather reckless as they had to be in their quest for domination. They were basically soldiers, and their ambitions directly led to civil wars. Cicero, for all his vanities and ambitions, did not seek that type of hegemony.

I agree, I would have liked to have seen more Cicero's true thoughts throughout his work, like his letters and various defense work. That he often didn't have fortitude or courage to act according to his own philosophy, I agree, but I don't see why he is being seen as a political weasel. Each time he submitted to prevailing power (first triumvirate and Caesar's dictatorship), he did not seek to further his political standing but rather ended up retiring away from politics. I'd call his actions stupid, but not opportunistic. And in various occassions (defending Roscio of Ameria, prosecuting Verres, supporting Pompey over Caesar, going against Antony instead of going to Greece), he chose a more dangerous road over safer one. Those times when he submitted, one could argue (whether rightly or wrongly) that resistance was futile. I'd rather think that in these times of turmoil, Rome needed more of pragmatic moderates like Cicero. I think many of his faults are mainly those that have to do with his personality and emotion. So not exactly the leadership material, but I think to described him as a weasel is not to understand him at all (at least in Roman terms).

I don't mean to start a fight, but my pet peeve is white folk acting as if they are suffering from some sort of reverse racism.

I got this idea from HBO Rome board, plus election season coming up. These are my feeble attempts at Roman style bumper stickers and slogans. I'm sure some here can offer better examples. Caesar for Consul Land for Every Pleb! Venus approves this message. Vote Pompey (elephant logo) Tough Against Crimes Pompey Gets Job Done Cicero SPQR '63 O tempora, o mores Cedant arma togae

Thank you for recommendataions.

Cicero vs. Antony <4> (April - May 43 BC) - "If we want to be merciful, we shall never be without a civil war." Brutus letters at last. In these letters, Brutus comes off as the noblest Roman after all. But was he right in seeking due process and compromise with Antony? Was Cicero too fanatical against Antony?

Cicero vs. Antony <3> (Dec. 44 BC - March 43 BC) - "I beg you to throw yourself into the cause of the Republic." Cicero writes to various generals to rally to the cause of the Senate. The last letter is from Antony to Hirtius and Octavian.

Sorry for interrupting this serious discussion, but I came across this blog from Huffington Post written by HBO Rome series fan, Washingtonia: The Spin-Off of "Rome ,which I thought was hilarious.

I'm pretty sure that Fuller's source is Pro Caelio.

The earliest one I came across is one in 51 BC when Cicero was in Cilicia (in which he askes Cassius to prevent extension of his term like he does in almost every letter he wrote ). There he says that as a boy Cassius drew towards him and helped him in his darkest days. (I suppose exile) But I think his letters become more numerous and intimate later in 46. In fact, he becomes very close to Brutus, Cassius, Trebonius, etc, that one might think he was in it if we didn't know better. This was before Cassius went to Syria. As Cicero complained that it was done with courage of men but planning of children, Cassius and Co. didn't seem to have planned to seize power in any manner, which makes me doubt that Cassius killed Caesar because of jealousy or perceived slight. Are we really to believe that Cassius was so angry with Caesar that he promoted his brother-in-law Brutus that he plotted his death with the said Brutus?! As for Matius' letter, I totally agree.

Augusta. Exactly my sentiment. Although it seems that atheism existed in ancient times, I would say that it was always an extreme minority and I venture to say that it will remain so as long as we face mortality.

I don't see this in Fuller, and I've not seen anywhere that Cicero had a change of heart about Catiline. Are you sure you've got this reference correct? The only place I saw about Cicero having a good word for Catiline is in Pro Caelio, in which he says:

Cicero vs Antony <2> (September - November 44 BC) - "Consider his name, consider his age!" After delivering the 1st Philippic, Cicero is courted by Octavian and after some hesitation, decides to return to Rome and engage in the final struggle against Antony.

Please don't hesitate to post on account of the flow of the post. I update the first post with master list each time I add something new. To be perfectly frank, I did not begin this thread with purely altruistic reason. I was hoping to talk with others about what I was reading and at first mentioned some of things that one could discuss, but I guess there's not much to talk about.

Cicero vs. Antony <1> (2 September 44 BC) - Excerpts from 1st Philippic: "If I say insulting remark against his private life, I shall not object to him treating me as a bitterest enemy" Due to lack of interest, I think I'll make just a few more batches of Cicero letters. I am wondering if I should finish off with the last period or earlier letters that I did't cover yet. Any request or feeback?

Ides of March <3>