Trial of Caius Rabirius

[Kosmo]

One objects for censorship and the next against it?

I think that MPC's "extremely imaginative foul language" was very funny even if I find Caesar intriguing.

If you like the Late Republic you should apreciate witty rethorics and respond in kind. That's what Caesar did with "Anticaton"

And if you want to make a case for Caesar (not that he needs one) being on-topic will help.

[G-Manicus]

I'm quite certain the reason was, not just that it was an attack on MPC, but that it was OFF TOPIC. Now, I'm as guilty as anyone when it comes to taking threads off topic (okay, okay ... MORE guilty), but quite clearly the discussion had diverged from the fact that the trial of Gaius Rabirius had CLEARLY taken place AFTER Cataline. :-) Those posts deserved to go to Tartatus, just as these most recent posts (including mine) deserve to end up in Tartarus.

[G-Manicus]

Say it isn't so! Not the deified catamite of Bithynia! Nothing naughty about the Venereal butcher of Gaul! Oh, no--we must fix the chronology to save Caesar's reputation from being naughty. LOL.

What about to the point itself? What would the rationale be for trying Rabirius on a 37 year old charge BEFORE Cataline? Was it Caesar just trying to do anything to stick his thumb in the eyes of the Boni? Not sure I buy the "coincidence" in him deciding to do that and then lo and behold, Cicero goes vigilante on the conspirators later that same year. As it appears you read McCullough's notes, I think you'd allow that (Caesar worship aside) she does paint a compelling case for the trial happening after Cataline, no?

[M. Porcius Cato]

I still object to the foul language used by MPC regarding Caesar, this forum can be used you know by minors and civilized adults

 

What foul language? I used no foul language.

[Primus Pilus]

I deleted the thread because MPC, via private message, indicated he had no intention of responding to it. Since it was more of a personal statement towards him more so than a discussion of Caesar's merits (in my opinion), I saw no point in leaving it.

 

Feel free to start a discussion on the qualities of Caesar, but try to leave the personal stuff out of it. This is not favoritism. Posts by MPC have also been deleted/edited in the past when they take on a more personal nature in the heat of a discussion. However, as long as those discussions continue to take place, we attempt to leave things as they are. If there is no response, what's the point of leaving it. The original post is still visible in the Tartarus forum, but again, since MPC has no interest in replying, leaving it for public comment by others is pointless.

[G-Manicus]

MPC is just fraidy scared to admit that maybe McCullough makes a good case for the trial to occur after Cataline. Because, if she's right about that, then maybe she's right about other stuff (eg: Caesar > Cato)

Edited January 25, 2008 by G-Manicus

[M. Porcius Cato]

Say it isn't so! Not the deified catamite of Bithynia! Nothing naughty about the Venereal butcher of Gaul! Oh, no--we must fix the chronology to save Caesar's reputation from being naughty. LOL.

What about to the point itself? What would the rationale be for trying Rabirius on a 37 year old charge BEFORE Cataline? Was it Caesar just trying to do anything to stick his thumb in the eyes of the Boni?

 

There's no need to view Caesar's motivation this way. The target clearly wasn't Rabirius (hence, the charges were dropped) or even the party of Catulus (hence, no further charges were brought), but the SCU itself. The SCU was emerging as the preferred mechanism for dealing with temporary crises--preferable, that is, to dictatorship, which was seen by many (including ultimately Pompey) as a dangerous office that could be abused by another Sulla. At this juncture in Roman history, NOBODY wanted another Sulla. (Well, almost nobody--there was a band of entitled young patricians who seemed to love the idea of wearing purple...when they weren't wearing pink.)

 

Constitutionally, this conflict was inevitable. There had to be something to deal with the weaknesses of the co-consulship during a crisis. Caesar's apparent view--and this is clear from his behavior during his entire career--was against the SCU and for the office of dictator. Working against the SCU is consistent with his support for the office of dictator, as were his comments regarding Sulla's foolishness in giving up the office voluntarily, was his support for Pompey's extraordinary powers, as was his marriage to the daughter of the blood-stained Sulla, as was his approach to his own consulship, as was his own seizing of the dictatorship for himself. Of course, each of these actions might be explained ad hoc, but together they point to a consistent constitutional view. At the very least, Caesar never showed himself to be opposed to the dictatorship (to say the very least).

 

As it appears you read McCullough's notes, I think you'd allow that (Caesar worship aside) she does paint a compelling case for the trial happening after Cataline, no?

 

First, McCullough herself says that her reconstruction is BASED on her Caesar-worship (see quote above). That said, one of her hypotheses was worth thinking about--namely, that the trial was cut short because Catiline's army was in the field and that this was the reason for lowering the red flag. It's an imaginative idea, but it's hardly compelling.

[G-Manicus]

The SCU was emerging as the preferred mechanism for dealing with temporary crises

I know the timeline of some of the events in 63 BC are a little murky, but is it known when the Senatus Consultum Ultimum was granted to Cicero?

 

 

Caesar's apparent view--and this is clear from his behavior during his entire career--was against the SCU and for the office of dictator.

Is it your view that was what Caesar was after all along? Even if the Senate yielded to his request to run for Consul in absentia? Do you think Caesar would still have been moved to make a grab for Dictator? I know it's hypothetical, but I'd be interested to know your opinion.

[M. Porcius Cato]

The SCU was emerging as the preferred mechanism for dealing with temporary crises

I know the timeline of some of the events in 63 BC are a little murky, but is it known when the Senatus Consultum Ultimum was granted to Cicero?

 

October 21. See Cic:Cat_1'4, '7; Sall:Cat_29'1-3; Plut:Cic_15'3-4; DioCass_37.31'1-2

 

 

Caesar's apparent view--and this is clear from his behavior during his entire career--was against the SCU and for the office of dictator.

Is it your view that was what Caesar was after all along? Even if the Senate yielded to his request to run for Consul in absentia? Do you think Caesar would still have been moved to make a grab for Dictator?

 

I think Caesar supported the OFFICE of dictator his whole life--or at least he wasn't opposed to it; he was also universally suspicious of the role of the senate his whole life (a cabal of plebs, don't you know?). That's all I wanted to argue--that in dealing with temporary crises, Caesar favored dictatorship to the Ultimate Decree, not that Caesar had designs on the dictatorship for himself as early as 63 BC (he may have, but the assumption isn't necessary for my argument).

[P.Clodius]

I deleted the thread because MPC, via private message, indicated he had no intention of responding to it. Since it was more of a personal statement towards him more so than a discussion of Caesar's merits (in my opinion), I saw no point in leaving it.

 

Feel free to start a discussion on the qualities of Caesar, but try to leave the personal stuff out of it. This is not favoritism. Posts by MPC have also been deleted/edited in the past when they take on a more personal nature in the heat of a discussion. However, as long as those discussions continue to take place, we attempt to leave things as they are. If there is no response, what's the point of leaving it. The original post is still visible in the Tartarus forum, but again, since MPC has no interest in replying, leaving it for public comment by others is pointless.

OK I see the point, and I now see there is mos maiorum for the Final Act.... :-) Anyway, back to Rabirius....

[P.Clodius]

Cicero himself gives us a clue, though far from concrete, but perhaps he saw in the trial himself as a future target.

Pro C. Rabiro perduellionis reo

"...But the true design of this prosecution is, that that great aid which the majesty of the state and our dominion enjoys, and which has been handed down to us from our ancestors, may be banished from the republic; that the authority of the senate, and the absolute power of the consul, and the unanimity of all good men, may henceforth be of no avail against any mischief or ruin designed to the state..."