Ad Familiares 15.4
Ad Familiares 15.4
Headnote
Cicero to M. Porcius Cato, written from his proconsular province late in 51 BC (the manuscript dateline: Scr. Tarsi vel ex. a. 703 (51) vel in. 704 (50)). The letter is the formal proconsular dispatch in which Cicero reports the military campaign of his single year of office in Cilicia: the season’s movements, the false alarm of a Parthian invasion of Syria, the relief of Ariobarzanes of Cappadocia, the operation on Mount Amanus, the fifty-seven-day siege of the hill-town of Pindenissus, and the eventual quartering of the army for the winter. It is, in its first half, the most extended piece of military narrative in the correspondence: a Roman public-record register, with dates by the Roman calendar, named legates, and the running list of pacified places. Cicero is not campaigning in any first-rate sense — Pindenissus is a hill-fort, not Pharsalus — but he is on a real military footing, the Parthian danger is real, and the operations earned his men’s salutation of him as imperator.
The whole apparatus of narration, however, is preliminary to the second half of the letter, which is the political point: Cicero is asking Cato for his vote in the forthcoming senatorial motions on a public thanksgiving (supplicatio) and the implicit later motion for a triumph. The request is made with elaborate, slightly anxious care — Cato is famously parsimonious with such honours, has refused them to others Cicero does not name, and is the one senator whose endorsement would settle the matter. Cicero therefore lays out three arguments in turn: that he has governed with equity and self-restraint (Cato’s own test), that the military achievement, modest in absolute terms, is comparable to operations for which others have received the highest honours, and — the third argument, made with characteristic candour — that he who once let a triumph pass after his consulship now wants one, to heal the wound of his exile in 58 BC and the public recognition it took from him.
The closing move, philosophy summoned in to plead for him, has often been read as ornament; it is not. It is Cicero’s most precise statement of where he and Cato stood together in the politics of the late 50s: as the two senators who tried to make the inherited Greek philosophical tradition do real work in the running of the commonwealth. “Almost alone of men, we took that true and ancient philosophy, which to some appears a thing of leisure and idleness, down into the forum and the commonwealth and almost into the line of battle itself.” Cato did, in the event, vote against the supplicatio; the historical reading is that he did so on principle, not from any cooling of the friendship, and Cicero’s surviving reply (Fam. 15.6) takes exactly that view. The triumph itself never came: the Civil War overtook the question.