First Philippic
Philippica I
Headnote
Delivered in the Senate on 2 September 44 BC, the first of the fourteen orations against Mark Antony to which Cicero himself, half-jocularly in a letter to Atticus, would lend Demosthenes’s title — Philippics, after the Demosthenic speeches against Philip of Macedon. Antony had summoned the Senate to vote a public supplicatio of thanksgiving in honour of the dead Caesar’s memory, a measure Cicero would not attend and could not in conscience support. The speech recounts in its opening sections (§1–10) Cicero’s reluctance to come up to the City at all: his abortive trip toward Greece in July (he had reached Leucopetra, on the toe of Italy, before contrary winds drove him back), and his return at the news, brought to him at Regium, that Brutus and Cassius had issued a conciliatory edict and that the September Kalends Senate would be calm. Hearing en route that Antony had in fact convened a hostile Senate on 1 September and demanded the consular Cicero’s attendance with threats to demolish his house, Cicero arrived a day late and on the morrow rose to speak. The speech is the opening of the campaign that would consume the last year and a half of his life and end in his proscription on the Triumviral lists in November 43 and his death at Formiae on 7 December.
Its argument has a curiously double character. Cicero addresses Antony as a friend who has gone astray, and is generous with credit where it can be given: in §3–4 he praises Antony’s abolition of the dictatorship as the genuinely free act it was (“a kind of light seemed to have been let in upon us, now that not only the kingship that we had endured but even the fear of kingship had been lifted away”); §31–32 dwell on the brilliance of Antony’s speech in the temple of Tellus on 17 March, on the embassy of his small son sent up into the Capitol as a pledge of peace. But §16–26 are the indictment proper: Antony’s measures of the summer, carried under the cloak of Caesar’s acta, are not Caesar’s acts at all but forged authority — the tertia decuria that opens juries to centurions and to ordinary legionaries of the Larks, the appeals-law that empties the standing courts for vis and maiestas, the colonial commissions and exemptions. §27 fixes the speech’s terms: if Antony will let Cicero speak freely, well and good; if not, let him at least be angry as a citizen rather than as an armed man. §33–38 are the moral case — that to be feared rather than loved is invidiosum, detestabile, imbecillum, caducum, that no man is happy who lives on terms by which he can be killed with glory to his killer (the exitus C. Caesaris); and the apostrophic O beatos illos of §36 turns, with grief, on Brutus’s absence at his own praetorian games. The savage personal invective for which the Philippics would become famous is reserved for the never-delivered Second Philippic, written as a pamphlet in October and circulated later in the year. The First Philippic, alone of the fourteen, still keeps the form of an appeal.
Before I speak, senators, of what I think must be said in the present state of the commonwealth, I shall set out for you briefly the reasons both for my going away and for my coming back. As long as I had any hope that the commonwealth had at last been recalled to your counsel and authority, I held that I must stay in place, as if on a consular and senatorial watch. Nor indeed did I ever depart anywhere, nor did I take my eyes off the commonwealth, from the day on which we were summoned together to the temple of Tellus. In that temple, so far as it lay in my power, I laid the foundations of peace, and renewed the old precedent of the Athenians; I even pressed into service the Greek word that city had once used in calming its civil discord amnestia, and I urged that all memory of our dissensions ought to be wiped out by an everlasting forgetfulness.
ante quam de re publica, patres conscripti, dicam ea quae dicenda hoc tempore arbitror, exponam vobis breviter consilium et profectionis et reversionis meae. ego cum sperarem aliquando ad vestrum consilium auctoritatemque rem publicam esse revocatam, manendum mihi statuebam quasi in vigilia quadam consulari ac senatoria. nec vero usquam discedebam nec a re publica deiciebam oculos ex eo die quo in aedem telluris convocati sumus. in quo templo, quantum in me fuit, ieci fundamenta pacis Atheniensiumque renovavi vetus exemplum; Graecum etiam verbum usurpavi quo tum in sedandis discordiis usa erat civitas illa, atque omnem memoriam discordiarum oblivione sempiterna delendam censui.
Brilliant then was the speech of Marcus Antonius, and his goodwill outstanding too; peace, in the end, was confirmed through him and through his children with the most distinguished of our citizens. And the rest answered to such beginnings. To those deliberations on the commonwealth which he held at his own house he invited the leading men of the state; to this order he brought the best of measures; nothing was then found in the records of Gaius Caesar except what was already known to all; he answered with complete consistency the questions that were put to him.
praeclara tum oratio M. Antoni, egregia etiam voluntas; pax denique per eum et per liberos eius cum praestantissimis civibus confirmata est. atque his principiis reliqua consentiebant. ad deliberationes eas quas habebat domi de re publica principes civitatis adhibebat; ad hunc ordinem res optimas deferebat; nihil tum nisi quod erat notum omnibus in C. Caesaris commentariis reperiebatur; summa constantia ad ea quae quaesita erant respondebat.
Had any exiles been brought back? One, he said, and besides him no one. Had any exemptions been granted? “None,” he answered. He even wanted us to agree to the proposal of Servius Sulpicius, a most distinguished man, that no tablet should be set up after the Ides of March bearing any decree or grant of favour of Caesar’s. I pass over many things, and brilliant ones; for my speech hurries on to one singular act of Marcus Antonius. The dictatorship, which had by then usurped the force of regal power, he rooted out of the commonwealth entirely; on that we did not even cast our votes. He brought in a senatorial decree, drawn up as he wished it to be passed; when it had been read out, we followed his authority with the highest enthusiasm and gave him thanks, by a decree of the Senate, in the amplest terms.
num qui exsules restituti? Vnum aiebat, praeterea neminem. num immunitates datae? ‘ nullae ’ respondebat. adsentiri etiam nos Ser. Sulpicio, clarissimo viro, voluit, ne qua tabula post Idus Martias ullius decreti Caesaris aut benefici figeretur. multa praetereo eaque praeclara; ad singulare enim M. Antoni factum festinat oratio. dictaturam, quae iam vim regiae potestatis obsederat, funditus ex re publica sustulit; de qua ne sententias quidem diximus. scriptum senatus consultum quod fieri vellet attulit, quo recitato auctoritatem eius summo studio secuti sumus eique amplissimis verbis per senatus consultum gratias egimus.
A kind of light seemed to have been let in upon us, now that not only the kingship that we had endured but even the fear of kingship had been lifted away, and a great pledge had been given by him to the commonwealth that he wished it to be a free state, when he had rooted out of the commonwealth entirely the very name of dictator — a name that had often been legitimate — because the perpetual dictatorship was still fresh in memory.
lux quaedam videbatur oblata non modo regno, quod pertuleramus, sed etiam regni timore sublato, magnumque pignus ab eo rei publicae datum, se liberam civitatem esse velle, cum dictatoris nomen, quod saepe iustum fuisset, propter perpetuae dictaturae recentem memoriam funditus ex re publica sustulisset.
The Senate, a few days later, was freed from the danger of slaughter; the hook was driven into that runaway slave who had usurped the name of Marius. And all of this in common with his colleague; the rest, again, belongs properly to Dolabella — and would, I believe, have been shared in common, had his colleague not been away. For while a measureless evil was creeping through the city and spreading wider day by day, while the very men who had given that unburied corpse its burial were making a funeral pyre of it in the forum, and while every day, more and more, abandoned wretches with their like among the slaves were threatening the houses and temples of the city, such was Dolabella’s chastisement, both of the audacious and criminal slaves and of the foul and impious freedmen, and such his overthrow of that accursed column, that I find it astonishing how widely the time that followed has differed from that one day.
liberatus periculo caedis paucis post diebus senatus; uncus impactus est fugitivo illi qui in Mari nomen invaserat. atque haec omnia communiter cum conlega; alia porro propria Dolabellae quae, nisi conlega afuisset, credo eis futura fuisse communia. nam cum serperet in urbe infinitum malum idque manaret in dies latius, idemque bustum in foro facerent qui illam insepultam sepulturam effecerant, et cotidie magis magisque perditi homines cum sui similibus servis tectis ac templis urbis minarentur, talis animadversio fuit Dolabellae cum in audacis sceleratosque servos, tum in impuros et nefarios liberos, talisque eversio illius exsecratae columnae ut mihi mirum videatur tam valde reliquum tempus ab illo uno die dissensisse.
For lo, on the Kalends of June, on which they had given notice for us to be present, everything was changed: nothing through the Senate, much business of weight through the people, and that with the people absent and against its will. The consuls-elect kept saying that they did not dare come into the Senate; the liberators of their country were kept away from the city whose servile yoke they had thrown off her neck — though the consuls themselves in their public speeches and in all their conversation kept praising them. The so-called veterans, for whom this order had taken the most diligent precautions, were being stirred up not to the protection of what they had but to the hope of new plunder. Since I preferred to hear of these things rather than to see them, and since I had the right of a free legation, I went away in the resolve to be present on the Kalends of January, which seemed likely to be the beginning of the Senate’s being convened.
ecce enim Kalendis Iuniis, quibus ut adessemus edixerant, mutata omnia: nihil per senatum, multa et magna per populum et absente populo et invito. consules designati negabant se audere in senatum venire; patriae liberatores urbe carebant ea cuius a cervicibus iugum servile deiecerant, quos tamen ipsi consules in contionibus et in omni sermone laudabant. veterani qui appellabantur, quibus hic ordo diligentissime caverat, non ad conservationem earum rerum quas habebant, sed ad spem novarum praedarum incitabantur. quae cum audire mallem quam videre haberemque ius legationis liberum, ea mente discessi ut adessem Kalendis Ianuariis, quod initium senatus cogendi fore videbatur.
I have set out, senators, the reasoning of my departure: I shall now briefly set out that of my return, which has more in it to surprise. When I had avoided Brundisium and that worn road to Greece, and not without cause, on the Kalends of August I came to Syracuse, since the crossing into Greece from that city was well spoken of: yet that city, most closely tied to me as it is, for all its wishing to keep me longer than a single night, could not. I was afraid that my sudden arrival to my friends there might bring some shadow of suspicion upon them, if I lingered. When the winds had carried me from Sicily as far as Leucopetra, which is a promontory of the Regian territory, from that place I embarked to make the crossing; but not very far out, I was driven back by a southerly gale to the very spot from which I had embarked.
exposui, patres conscripti, profectionis consilium: nunc reversionis, quae plus admirationis habet, breviter exponam. cum Brundisium iterque illud quod tritum in Graeciam est non sine causa vitavissem, Kalendis Sextilibus veni Syracusas, quod ab ea urbe transmissio in Graeciam laudabatur: quae tamen urbs mihi coniunctissima plus una me nocte cupiens retinere non potuit. veritus sum ne meus repentinus ad meos necessarios adventus suspicionis aliquid adferret, si essem commoratus. cum autem me ex Sicilia ad Leucopetram, quod est promunturium agri Regini, venti detulissent, ab eo loco conscendi ut transmitterem; nec ita multum provectus reiectus austro sum in eum ipsum locum unde conscenderam.
When night had fallen and I had stayed at the country house of Publius Valerius, my companion and intimate, and the next day, still under the same roof, was waiting for a wind, many of the townsmen of Regium came to see me, some of them fresh from Rome: from these I first received Marcus Antonius’s address to the assembly — which so pleased me, on reading it, that I began for the first time to think of turning back. Not long after, the edict of Brutus and Cassius was brought to me, which to me, perhaps because I love them even more for the commonwealth’s sake than for friendship’s, seemed full of equity. They added besides — for it commonly happens that men who wish to bring good news add something of their own to make what they announce more cheerful — that there would be an accommodation: the Senate would be in full session on the Kalends; Antony, having sent his bad advisers packing and given up the Gallic provinces, would come back to the Senate’s authority.
Cumque intempesta nox esset mansissemque in villa P. Valeri, comitis et familiaris mei, postridieque apud eundem ventum exspectans manerem, municipes Regini complures ad me venerunt, ex eis quidam Roma recentes: a quibus primum accipio M. Antoni contionem, quae mihi ita placuit ut ea lecta de reversione primum coeperim cogitare. nec ita multo post edictum Bruti adfertur et Cassi, quod quidem mihi, fortasse quod eos plus etiam rei publicae quam familiaritatis gratia diligo, plenum aequitatis videbatur. addebant praeterea—fit enim plerumque ut ei qui boni quid volunt adferre adfingant aliquid quo faciant id quod nuntiant laetius—rem conventuram: Kalendis senatum frequentem fore; Antonium, repudiatis malis suasoribus, remissis provinciis Galliis, ad auctoritatem senatus esse rediturum.
Then in truth I was set on fire with such eagerness to return that no oars and no winds could satisfy me, not that I thought I should fail to reach Rome in time, but that I might not give thanks to the commonwealth more slowly than I longed to. Sailing rapidly down to Velia, I saw Brutus: with what grief on my part, I do not say. It seemed shameful to me to dare to come back into the city out of which Brutus was withdrawing, and to wish to be safe in a place where he could not be. Yet I did not find him stirred as I myself was. Rather, upraised by his consciousness of his very great and most beautiful deed, he was complaining of nothing for himself, much for you.
tum vero tanta sum cupiditate incensus ad reditum ut mihi nulli neque remi neque venti satis facerent, non quo me ad tempus occursurum non putarem, sed ne tardius quam cuperem rei publicae gratularer. atque ego celeriter Veliam devectus Brutum vidi: quanto meo dolore non dico. turpe mihi ipsi videbatur in eam urbem me audere reverti ex qua Brutus cederet, et ibi velle tuto esse ubi ille non posset. neque vero illum similiter atque ipse eram commotum esse vidi. erectus enim maximi ac pulcherrimi facti sui conscientia nihil de suo casu, multa de vestro querebatur.
And from him I first learned what speech Lucius Piso had made in the Senate on the Kalends of August: a speech which, although he was too little — this very thing I had heard from Brutus — supported by those whose duty it was, yet by Brutus’s witness — and what can be of greater weight than that? — and by the testimony of everyone I have seen since, seemed to me to have won great glory. To follow him, then, I made haste — him whom those present had not followed — not that I expected to accomplish anything (for I neither hoped for it nor could promise it), but so that, if anything in the way of human chance should befall me (and many things appear to be hanging over us beyond nature and beyond fate), I might still leave the voice of this day as a witness to the commonwealth of my unbroken goodwill towards her.
exque eo primum cognovi quae Kalendis Sextilibus in senatu fuisset L. Pisonis oratio: qui quamquam parum erat—id enim ipsum a Bruto audieram—a quibus debuerat adiutus, tamen et Bruti testimonio—quo quid potest esse gravius?—et omnium praedicatione quos postea vidi magnam mihi videbatur gloriam consecutus. hunc igitur ut sequerer properavi quem praesentes non sunt secuti, non ut proficerem aliquid—nec enim sperabam id nec praestare poteram—sed ut, si quid mihi humanitus accidisset—multa autem impendere videntur praeter naturam etiam praeterque fatum—huius tamen diei vocem testem rei publicae relinquerem meae perpetuae erga se voluntatis.
Since I am confident, senators, that the reasoning of both decisions has been approved by you, before I begin to speak of the commonwealth I shall briefly complain of yesterday’s affront from Marcus Antonius — of whose friend I am, and which, for some service of his, I have always made open profession that I ought to be. What, then, was the cause that yesterday I should be so harshly compelled into the Senate? Was I alone absent? or have you not often been less than full in number? or was a matter being transacted that called for even the sick to be brought in? Hannibal, I suppose, was at the gates, or the question of peace with Pyrrhus was being debated — the very business to which, the record says, that famous Appius was brought in, blind and aged.
quoniam utriusque consili causam, patres conscripti, probatam vobis esse confido, prius quam de re publica dicere incipio, pauca querar de hesterna M. Antoni iniuria: cui sum amicus, idque me non nullo eius officio debere esse prae me semper tuli. quid tandem erat causae cur die hesterno in senatum tam acerbe cogerer? solusne aberam, an non saepe minus frequentes fuistis, an ea res agebatur ut etiam aegrotos deferri oporteret? Hannibal, credo, erat ad portas aut de Pyrrhi pace agebatur, ad quam causam etiam Appium illum et caecum et senem delatum esse memoriae proditum est.
The motion was concerning supplications — a kind of business in which senators do not usually fail to attend. For they are compelled not by sureties but by their regard for the men whose honour is in question; just as happens when a triumph is brought forward. The consuls accordingly take no trouble about it, so that it is almost a senator’s free choice whether or not to be there. Since this practice was known to me, and since I was weary from the road and unhappy with myself, I sent, in the name of our friendship, a man to tell him as much. But he, with you to hear him, said that he would come to my house with builders. This was both too angry and very intemperate. For what is the offence of which this is so great a penalty, that he should dare to say in this order that he would use the public workmen to pull down a house publicly built by decree of the Senate? Who has ever compelled a senator’s attendance with so great a fine? Or what penalty is there beyond surety or fine? But had he known the opinion I was going to deliver, he would surely have remitted something of the harshness of his summoning.
de supplicationibus referebatur, quo in genere senatores deesse non solent. coguntur enim non pignoribus, sed eorum de quorum honore agitur gratia; quod idem fit, cum de triumpho refertur. ita sine cura consules sunt ut paene liberum sit senatori non adesse. qui cum mihi mos notus esset cumque e via languerem et mihimet displicerem, misi pro amicitia qui hoc ei diceret. at ille vobis audientibus cum fabris se domum meam venturum esse dixit. nimis iracunde hoc quidem et valde intemperanter. cuius enim malefici tanta ista poena est ut dicere in hoc ordine auderet se publicis operis disturbaturum publice ex senatus sententia aedificatam domum? quis autem umquam tanto damno senatorem coegit? aut quid est ultra pignus aut multam? quod si scisset quam sententiam dicturus essem, remisisset aliquid profecto de severitate cogendi.
Or do you suppose, senators, that I should have voted, as you reluctantly voted, that funeral rites should be mingled with thanksgivings, that inexpiable religious offences should be brought into the commonwealth, that thanksgivings should be decreed for a dead man? I will not say for whom. Let it have been that famous Lucius Brutus, who both himself liberated the commonwealth from regal mastery and propagated his stock to a like virtue and a like deed almost into the five-hundredth year: I could not be brought to join any dead man with the worship of the immortal gods — so that public supplication should be made to one whose tomb stands somewhere with rites of the dead performed at it. For my part I should have given an opinion such that I could easily defend it before the Roman people if some heavier disaster overtook the commonwealth — if there were war, if pestilence, if famine; some of which are already upon us, others of which I fear are hanging over us. But may the immortal gods pardon this, I pray, both to the Roman people, which does not approve it, and to this order, which decreed it against its will.
an me censetis, patres conscripti, quod vos inviti secuti estis, decreturum fuisse, ut parentalia cum supplicationibus miscerentur, ut inexpiabiles religiones in rem publicam inducerentur, ut decernerentur supplicationes mortuo? nihil dico cui. fuerit ille L. Brutus qui et ipse dominatu regio rem publicam liberavit et ad similem virtutem et simile factum stirpem iam prope in quingentesimum annum propagavit: adduci tamen non possem ut quemquam mortuum coniungerem cum deorum immortalium religione; ut, cuius sepulcrum usquam exstet ubi parentetur, ei publice supplicetur. ego vero eam sententiam dixissem ut me adversus populum Romanum, si qui accidisset gravior rei publicae casus, si bellum, si morbus, si fames, facile possem defendere; quae partim iam sunt, partim timeo ne impendeant. sed hoc ignoscant di immortales velim et populo Romano qui id non probat, et huic ordini qui decrevit invitus.
But what? On the other evils of the commonwealth, is one allowed to speak? Yes, I am allowed, and I shall always be allowed, to uphold the dignity of my office and to think nothing of death. Only let me have the power to come into this place: I shall not refuse the peril of speaking. And I wish, senators, that I had been able to be present on the Kalends of August! Not that anything could have been accomplished, but only that there might not be found, as on that day there was, one consular alone worthy of that office and worthy of the commonwealth. From which fact I take a great grief — that men who had enjoyed the most ample favours of the Roman people did not follow Lucius Piso as the leader of the best of opinions. Did the Roman people make us consuls for this — that, set on the highest step of dignity, we should count the commonwealth as nothing? Not one man assented to the consular Lucius Piso, not by voice, not even by a look.
quid? de reliquis rei publicae malis licetne dicere? mihi vero licet et semper licebit dignitatem tueri, mortem contemnere. potestas modo veniendi in hunc locum sit: dicendi periculum non recuso. atque utinam, patres conscripti, Kalendis Sextilibus adesse potuissem! non quo profici potuerit aliquid, sed ne unus modo consularis, quod tum accidit, dignus illo honore, dignus re publica inveniretur. qua quidem ex re magnum accipio dolorem, homines amplissimis populi Romani beneficiis usos L. Pisonem ducem optimae sententiae non secutos. idcircone nos populus Romanus consules fecit ut in altissimo gradu dignitatis locati rem publicam pro nihilo haberemus? non modo voce nemo L. Pisoni consulari sed ne voltu quidem adsensus est.
What, the devil, is this voluntary slavery? Some slavery there was that could not be helped; and I do not ask this kind of thing of all those who deliver their opinion in the place of consulars. The case is different of those whose silence I forgive; different again of those whose voice I miss. With grief I see them coming under the suspicion of the Roman people — not of fear (which would itself be shameful) but that each, for one cause or another, is failing his own dignity. For which reason I both give and feel the greatest thanks to Piso, who did not think what he could accomplish in the commonwealth but what he himself ought to do. And next I ask of you, senators, that even if you will be less bold in following my speech and my authority, you will still hear me kindly, as you have done up to now.
quae, malum, est ista voluntaria servitus? fuerit quaedam necessaria; neque ego hoc ab omnibus eis desidero qui sententiam consulari loco dicunt. Alia causa est eorum quorum silentio ignosco; alia eorum, quorum vocem requiro. quos quidem doleo in suspicionem populo Romano venire non metu, quod ipsum esset turpe, sed alium alia de causa deesse dignitati suae. qua re primum maximas gratias et ago et habeo Pisoni, qui non quid efficere posset in re publica cogitavit, sed quid facere ipse deberet. deinde a vobis, patres conscripti, peto ut, etiam si sequi minus audebitis orationem atque auctoritatem meam, benigne me tamen, ut fecistis adhuc, audiatis.
First, then, I hold that Caesar’s acts must be upheld — not that I approve them (for who can do that?) but because I judge the highest priority should be given to peace and quiet. I could wish that Marcus Antonius were present, only without his retinue of advocates — but, as I take it, he is allowed to be unwell, where yesterday on his account that was not allowed to me — and were here to teach me, or rather to teach you, senators, in what manner he himself would defend Caesar’s acts. Are they, set forth in those little notebooks and handwritten papers and memoranda, produced under his sole authority — not even produced, but merely talked of — to be the firm acts of Caesar; and the things which Caesar himself cut into bronze, in which he willed that the orders of the people and the laws should be made perpetual, to be counted for nothing?
primum igitur acta Caesaris servanda censeo, non quo probem—quis enim id quidem potest?—sed quia rationem habendam maxime arbitror pacis atque oti. vellem adesset M. Antonius, modo sine advocatis—sed, ut opinor, licet ei minus valere, quod mihi heri per illum non licuit —doceret me vel potius vos, patres conscripti, quem ad modum ipse Caesaris acta defenderet. an in commentariolis et chirographis et libellis se uno auctore prolatis, ne prolatis quidem sed tantum modo dictis, acta Caesaris firma erunt: quae ille in aes incidit, in quo populi iussa perpetuasque leges esse voluit, pro nihilo habebuntur?
For my part I judge that nothing is so much in Caesar’s acts as Caesar’s laws. Is it that, if he promised something to any man, that shall stand fixed, the very thing he could not do? — as he failed to make good many promises to many men: of which still many more have been discovered since his death than were ever conferred and given as favours through all the years of his life. But I do not change these or move them; I defend his brilliant acts with the highest enthusiasm. Would that the money in the temple of Ops were untouched! Bloody money, indeed, but in these times, since it is not being given back to those whose it is, money the commonwealth needs. Though let even that be poured out, if it stood so in his acts.
equidem existimo nihil tam esse in actis Caesaris quam leges Caesaris. an, si cui quid ille promisit, id erit fixum quod idem facere non potuit? ut multis multa promissa non fecit: quae tamen multo plura illo mortuo reperta sunt quam a vivo beneficia per omnis annos tributa et data. sed ea non muto, non moveo: summo studio illius praeclara acta defendo. pecunia utinam ad Opis maneret! cruenta illa quidem, sed his temporibus, quoniam eis quorum est non redditur, necessaria. quamquam ea quoque sit effusa, si ita in actis fuit.
Is there anything that can so properly be called an act of one who has held office, with power and command, in a civilian capacity in the commonwealth, as a law? Ask for the acts of Gracchus: the Sempronian laws will be produced; ask for those of Sulla: the Cornelian laws. What of Pompey’s third consulship? On what acts did it stand? On laws, surely. If you asked Caesar himself what he had done in the city and in the toga, he would answer that he had carried many laws, and brilliant ones, but the handwritten papers — he would either change them, or not produce them, or, if he had produced them, would not number those things among his acts. But on these very things I yield; in some matters I even shut my eyes; but in the greatest matters, that is, in the laws, that Caesar’s acts should be undone I cannot endure.
ecquid est quod tam proprie dici possit actum eius qui togatus in re publica cum potestate imperioque versatus sit quam lex? quaere acta Gracchi: leges Semproniae proferentur; quaere Sullae: Corneliae. quid? Pompei tertius consulatus in quibus actis constitit? nempe in legibus. de Caesare ipso si quaereres quidnam egisset in urbe et in toga, leges multas responderet se et praeclaras tulisse, chirographa vero aut mutaret aut non daret aut, si dedisset, non istas res in actis suis duceret. sed haec ipsa concedo; quibusdam etiam in rebus coniveo; in maximis vero rebus, id est in legibus, acta Caesaris dissolvi ferendum non puto.
What law was better, more useful, more often demanded even when the commonwealth was at its best, than that praetorian provinces should not be held for more than one year, nor consular provinces for more than two? Does it seem to you that, with this law overthrown, Caesar’s acts can be upheld? Again, in the law that has been promulgated concerning a third decury (tertia decuria — a new panel of jurors), are not all of Caesar’s juror-laws (leges iudiciariae) being undone? And do you defend Caesar’s acts who overturn his laws? Unless, perhaps, if he set down some memorandum in a notebook, that is to be reckoned among his acts and, however unjust and useless it may be, defended; and what he carried before the people in the centuriate assembly is not to be held among the acts of Caesar.
quae lex melior, utilior, optima etiam re publica saepius flagitata quam ne praetoriae provinciae plus quam annum neve plus quam biennium consulares obtinerentur? hac lege sublata videnturne vobis posse Caesaris acta servari? quid? lege quae promulgata est de tertia decuria nonne omnes iudiciariae leges Caesaris dissolvuntur? et vos acta Caesaris defenditis qui leges eius evertitis? Nisi forte, si quid memoriae causa rettulit in libellum, id numerabitur in actis et, quamvis iniquum et inutile sit, defendetur: quod ad populum centuriatis comitiis tulit, id in actis Caesaris non habebitur.
But what is this lex-antonia-de-tertia-decuria/">third decury? “Of centurions,” he says. What? Was that order not open to a place on the jury under the Julian law (lex Iulia), and earlier under the Pompeian (lex Pompeia) and the Aurelian (lex Aurelia)? “A property qualification was prescribed,” he says. Not for the centurion alone but for the Roman knight as well; and so the bravest and most honourable of men who have led companies of the line both sit on juries and have done so. “I am not asking after those,” he says. “Whoever has led a company, let him be a juror.” Yet if you proposed that anyone at all who had served in the cavalry — which is a more polished thing — should be a juror, you would persuade no one; for in a juror both fortune and dignity ought to be looked at. “I am not asking after those things,” he says. “I add even jurors taken from the rank and file out of the Legion of the Larks. For otherwise our men say they cannot be safe.” What an insulting honour for those you summon to judge against their expectation! For this is what the law is in fact pointing to — that those should judge in the third decury who would not dare to judge in freedom. And in this what an error — by the immortal gods! — in those who thought up such a law! For just as each man shall seem most disreputable, just so most gladly shall he wash off his disreputability by the strictness of his judging, and shall labour to seem worthy rather of the respectable decuries than rightly cast into the contemptible.
at quae est ista tertia decuria? ‘ centurionum ’ inquit. quid? isti ordini iudicatus lege Iulia, etiam ante Pompeia, Aurelia non patebat? ‘ census praefiniebatur,’ inquit. non centurioni quidem solum sed equiti etiam Romano; itaque viri fortissimi atque honestissimi qui ordines duxerunt res et iudicant et iudicaverunt. ‘ non quaero’ inquit ‘istos: quicumque ordinem duxit, iudicet.’ at si ferretis quicumque equo meruisset, quod est lautius, nemini probaretis; in iudice enim spectari et fortuna debet et dignitas. ‘ non quaero’ inquit ‘ista: addo etiam iudices manipularis ex legione alaudarum. aliter enim nostri negant posse se salvos esse.’ O contumeliosum honorem eis quos ad iudicandum nec opinantis vocatis! hic enim est legis index ut ei res in tertia decuria iudicent qui libere iudicare non audeant. in quo quantus error est, di immortales! eorum qui istam legem excogitaverunt! Vt enim quisque sordidissimus videbitur, ita libentissime severitate iudicandi sordis suas eluet laborabitque ut honestis decuriis potius dignus videatur quam in turpem iure coniectus.
Another law has been promulgated — that those condemned of violence and of treason should be allowed to appeal to the people, if they wish. Is this, then, a law, or rather the dissolving of all laws? For who is there today whose interest it is that such a law should stand? No one is under indictment by those laws, no one whom we suppose ever will be. For things done by arms will surely never be called into a court of law. “But it is a popular measure.” Would that you had wished for anything to be popular! For all citizens already agree, with one mind and one voice, about the safety of the commonwealth. What then is this desire to carry a law that has the highest disgrace in it and no favour? For what is more disgraceful than that the man who has by violence lessened the majesty of the Roman people, when condemned by judgment, should return to that very violence on whose account he was rightly condemned?
altera promulgata lex est ut et de vi et maiestatis damnati ad populum provocent, si velint. haec utrum tandem lex est an legum omnium dissolutio? quis est enim hodie cuius intersit istam legem manere? nemo reus est legibus illis, nemo quem futurum putemus. armis enim gesta numquam profecto in iudicium vocabuntur. ‘ at res popularis.’ Vtinam quidem aliquid velletis esse populare! omnes enim iam cives de rei publicae salute una et mente et voce consentiunt. quae est igitur ista cupiditas legis eius ferendae quae turpitudinem summam habeat, gratiam nullam? quid enim turpius quam qui maiestatem populi Romani minuerit per vim, eum damnatum iudicio ad eam ipsam vim reverti propter quam sit iure damnatus?
But why do I argue any further about the law? As if the point were that anyone should appeal: the point, the thing being carried, is that no one shall ever in any way be put on trial under those laws. For what prosecutor will be found mad enough to be willing, with the defendant condemned, to expose himself to a hired mob? or what juror to dare condemn a defendant, only to be himself dragged off at once before the hired claqueurs? It is not, then, the right of appeal that this law grants; rather, two of the most salutary laws and the standing courts they create are being abolished. What else is this than to incite our young men to wish to be turbulent, seditious, ruinous citizens? To what bane will the rage of a tribune not be driven, with these two inquiries into violence and treason taken away?
sed quid plura de lege disputo? quasi vero id agatur ut quisquam provocet: id agitur, id fertur ne quis omnino umquam istis legibus reus fiat. quis enim aut accusator tam amens reperietur qui reo condemnato obici se multitudini conductae velit, aut iudex qui reum damnare audeat, ut ipse ad operas mercennarias statim protrahatur? non igitur provocatio ista lege datur, sed duae maxime salutares leges quaestionesque tolluntur. quid est aliud hortari adulescentis ut turbulenti, ut seditiosi, ut perniciosi cives velint esse? quam autem ad pestem furor tribunicius impelli non poterit his duabus quaestionibus de vi et maiestate sublatis?
What further? Caesar’s laws are being repealed — laws that command that the man condemned of violence, and likewise the man condemned of treason, shall be barred from fire and water. When the right of appeal is given to such men, are not Caesar’s acts cut down? Yet I, senators, who never approved those laws, judged still that they should be kept up for the sake of concord, in such a way that I thought not only laws Caesar carried while living must not be undermined at this time, but not even those which you see produced and posted after his death.
quid, quod obrogatur legibus Caesaris, quae iubent ei qui de vi itemque ei qui maiestatis damnatus sit aqua et igni interdici? quibus cum provocatio datur, nonne acta Caesaris rescinduntur? quae quidem ego, patres conscripti, qui illa numquam probavi, tamen ita conservanda concordiae causa arbitratus sum ut non modo, quas vivus leges Caesar tulisset, infirmandas hoc tempore non putarem, sed ne illas quidem quas post mortem Caesaris prolatas esse et fixas videtis.
Men brought back from exile by a dead man; citizenship granted not only to individuals but to entire peoples and provinces by a dead man; tax-revenues abolished by exemptions without limit by a dead man. So we are defending these things, brought from his house on the single but supreme authority of one man; and the laws which he himself, with us looking on, read out, proclaimed, and carried — in whose carrying he gloried, and in whose laws he held the commonwealth to be held together — the laws on provincial commands, on the courts, those laws, I say, the laws of Caesar, we who defend Caesar’s acts are to think must be overthrown?
de exsilio reducti a mortuo; civitas data non solum singulis sed nationibus et provinciis universis a mortuo; immunitatibus infinitis sublata vectigalia a mortuo. ergo haec uno, verum optimo auctore domo prolata defendimus: eas leges quas ipse nobis inspectantibus recitavit, pronuntiavit, tulit, quibus latis gloriabatur eisque legibus rem publicam contineri putabat, de provinciis, de iudiciis, eas, inquam, Caesaris leges nos qui defendimus acta Caesaris evertendas putamus?
And yet of these laws that have been promulgated we can at least complain: of those which are said already to have been carried, even that has not been allowed. For they were carried without any promulgation at all, before they were drafted. But I ask what reason there is why I, or any of you, senators, should fear bad laws under good tribunes of the plebs. We have men ready to interpose their veto; ready to defend the commonwealth on grounds of religion: we ought to be free of fear. “What vetoes do you bring up to me,” he says, “what religious grounds?” Those, of course, on which the safety of the commonwealth rests. “We have no regard for such things; we count them too old and silly: the forum shall be fenced off; every approach shall be closed; armed men shall be posted in many places.” What then?
ac de his tamen legibus quae promulgatae sunt saltem queri possumus: de eis quae iam latae dicuntur ne illud quidem licuit. illae enim sine ulla promulgatione latae sunt ante quam scriptae. quaero autem quid sit cur aut ego aut quisquam vestrum, patres conscripti, bonis tribunis plebi leges malas metuat. paratos habemus qui intercedant; paratos qui rem publicam religione defendant: vacui metu esse debemus. ‘ quas tu mihi’ inquit ‘intercessiones, quas religiones?’ eas scilicet quibus rei publicae salus continetur. ‘ neglegimus ista et nimis antiqua ac stulta ducimus: forum saepietur; omnes claudentur aditus; armati in praesidiis multis locis conlocabuntur.’ quid tum?
Whatever is done in that fashion — shall that be law? And you will give orders, I take it, to cut into bronze those formulaic words: “The consuls duly asked the people” — is this the right of asking that we inherit from our ancestors? “and the people duly voted.” What people? the one that was shut out? By what right? By the right that everything has been swept away by force and arms? I am speaking of what is to come, since it is the part of friends to speak in advance of what can be avoided: if these things shall not be done, my speech will stand refuted. I am speaking of laws promulgated, on which you still have a free hand; I am pointing out the faults: take them away! I am giving notice of violence: take away the arms!
quod ita erit gestum, id lex erit? et in aes incidi iubebitis, credo, illa legitima: consules populum iure rogaverunt —hocine a maioribus accepimus ius rogandi?— populusque iure scivit. qui populus? isne qui exclusus est? quo iure? an eo quod vi et armis omne sublatum est? atque haec dico de futuris, quod est amicorum ante dicere ea quae vitari possint: quae si facta non erunt, refelletur oratio mea. loquor de legibus promulgatis, de quibus est integrum vobis, demonstro vitia: tollite! denuntio vim: arma removete!
Nor will it become you, Dolabella, to be angry with me when I speak for the commonwealth. Though I do not think that you, at any rate, will do so — I know your easy temper — but they say your colleague has become an angry man in this fortune of his which seems good to him — though it would seem to me, not to speak of him more harshly, more fortunate if he imitated his grandfather’s and his uncle’s consulships. I see, however, what an odious thing it is to have the same man angry and armed, especially when there is such impunity for swords; but I shall propose terms which I think fair, and which I do not suppose Marcus Antonius will refuse. If I shall have said anything against his life or his manners by way of insult, I shall not deprecate that he be my bitterest enemy; but if I keep the practice I have always had in public matters, that is, if I speak freely what I think about the commonwealth, in the first place I beg him not to be angry; and next, if I do not obtain this, I ask that he be angry as a citizen. Let him have his arms, if it must be, as he says, for the sake of his own defence: only let those arms not harm men who shall have said for the commonwealth what seemed right to them. What can be said fairer than this demand?
irasci quidem vos mihi, Dolabella, pro re publica dicenti non oportebit. quamquam te quidem id facturum non arbitror—novi facilitatem tuam—conlegam tuum aiunt in hac sua fortuna quae bona ipsi videtur—mihi, ne gravius quippiam dicam, avorum et avunculi sui consulatum si imitaretur, fortunatior videretur—sed eum iracundum audio esse factum. video autem quam sit odiosum habere eundem iratum et armatum, cum tanta praesertim gladiorum sit impunitas: sed proponam ius, ut opinor, aequum, quod M. Antonium non arbitror repudiaturum. ego, si quid in vitam eius aut in mores cum contumelia dixero, quo minus mihi inimicissimus sit non recusabo; sin consuetudinem meam quam in re publica semper habui tenuero, id est si libere quae sentiam de re publica dixero, primum deprecor ne irascatur; deinde, si hoc non impetro, peto ut sic irascatur ut civi. armis utatur, si ita necesse est, ut dicit, sui defendendi causa: eis qui pro re publica quae ipsis visa erunt dixerint ista arma ne noceant. quid hac postulatione dici potest aequius?
But if — as has been said to me by some of his intimates — any speech delivered against his will offends him deeply, even if it contains no insult, we shall bear with the nature of a friend. But those same men also say this to me: “You, an opponent of Caesar’s, will not be allowed what was allowed to Piso his father-in-law”; and at the same time they warn me of something I shall be on guard against: “Sickness will be no more lawful an excuse for not coming into the Senate than death.”
quod si, ut mihi a quibusdam eius familiaribus dictum est, omnis eum quae habetur contra voluntatem eius oratio graviter offendit, etiam si nulla inest contumelia, feremus amici naturam. sed idem illi ita mecum loquuntur: ‘non idem tibi adversario Caesaris licebit quod Pisoni socero,’ et simul admonent quiddam quod cavebimus: ‘nec erit iustior in senatum non veniendi morbi causa quam mortis..
But, by the immortal gods — for as I look at you, Dolabella, who are most dear to me, I cannot keep silent about the error of you both — I do believe that you nobles, looking to something great, have aspired not to money (which some, who are too credulous, suspect, and which the noblest and most illustrious men have always despised), nor to violent power, nor to a domination too heavy for the Roman people to bear, but to the affection of the citizens and to glory. Now glory is the praise of right deeds and the great repute of services rendered to the commonwealth, which is approved by the witness of the best men no less than by that of the multitude.
sed per deos immortalis!—te enim intuens, Dolabella, qui es mihi carissimus, non possum de utriusque vestrum errore reticere. credo enim vos nobilis homines magna quaedam spectantis non pecuniam, ut quidam nimis creduli suspicantur, quae semper ab amplissimo quoque clarissimoque contempta est, non opes violentas et populo Romano minime ferendam potentiam, sed caritatem civium et gloriam concupivisse. est autem gloria laus recte factorum magnorumque in rem publicam fama meritorum, quae cum optimi cuiusque, tum etiam multitudinis testimonio comprobatur.
I would have said, Dolabella, what the fruit of right deeds is, if I did not see that you, beyond others, have for a little while had experience of it. What day in your life can you remember as having dawned more joyfully than that when, the forum purged, the throng of the impious scattered, the ringleaders of the crime punished, the city freed from fire and the fear of slaughter, you returned to your house? Of what order, of what class, of what fortune were the zealous demonstrations of praise and congratulation which did not offer themselves to you? Indeed, even to me did the good men give thanks — for by my advice they thought you were guiding yourself in these affairs — and they congratulated me in your name. Remember, I beg, Dolabella, that consensus of the theatre, when all, forgetting the things on whose account they had been offended with you, made it plain that by your recent kindness they had cast off the memory of their old grievance.
dicerem, Dolabella, qui recte factorum fructus esset, nisi te praeter ceteros paulisper esse expertum viderem. quem potes recordari in vita inluxisse tibi diem laetiorem quam cum expiato foro, dissipato concursu impiorum, principibus sceleris poena adfectis, urbe incendio et caedis metu liberata te domum recepisti? cuius ordinis, cuius generis, cuius denique fortunae studia tum laudi et gratulationi tuae se non obtulerunt? quin mihi etiam, quo auctore te in his rebus uti arbitrabantur, et gratias boni viri agebant et tuo nomine gratulabantur. recordare, quaeso, Dolabella, consensum illum theatri, cum omnes earum rerum obliti propter quas fuerant tibi offensi significarent se beneficio novo memoriam veteris doloris abiecisse.
This, Publius Dolabella — I speak in great grief — this, I say, were you able to lay aside in calm of mind, so great a dignity? And you, Marcus Antonius — for I address you in your absence — do you not set that one day on which the Senate was in the temple of Tellus above all these months in which certain men, very much my opposites in opinion, suppose you to be happy? What a speech yours was that day, on concord! From what fear was the Senate, from what trouble was the state freed by you that day, when, your enmities laid aside, forgetful of the auspices announced from yourself as augur of the Roman people, you willed that on that first day your colleague should be your colleague — when your little son was sent up by you into the Capitol as a pledge of peace!
hanc tu, P. Dolabella,— magno loquor cum dolore—hanc tu, inquam, potuisti aequo animo tantam dignitatem deponere? tu autem, M. Antoni, —absentem enim appello—unum illum diem quo in aede telluris senatus fuit non omnibus his mensibus quibus te quidam multum a me dissentientes beatum putant anteponis? quae fuit oratio de concordia! quanto metu senatus, quanta sollicitudine civitas tum a te liberata est cum conlegam tuum, depositis inimicitiis, oblitus auspiciorum a te ipso augure populi Romani nuntiatorum, illo primum die conlegam tibi esse voluisti; cum tuus parvus filius in Capitolium a te missus pacis obses fuit!
On what day was the Senate more joyful, on what the Roman people — which indeed in no assembly was ever more thickly thronged? At last we seemed to have been freed by the bravest of men, because, as they had willed, peace was following liberty. On the next day, the second, the third, and finally on all the days that followed, you did not cease to bring each day, as it were, some gift to the commonwealth; but the greatest was that you abolished the name of dictator. This brand was burnt by you — by you, I say — upon dead Caesar to his perpetual disgrace. For just as on account of the single crime of Marcus Manlius, by a decree of the Manlian clan, no patrician Manlius is permitted to be called Marcus, so you, on account of the hated name of one dictator, rooted out the name of dictator from the commonwealth entirely.
quo senatus die laetior, quo populus Romanus? qui quidem nulla in contione umquam frequentior fuit. tum denique liberati per viros fortissimos videbamur, quia, ut illi voluerant, libertatem pax consequebatur. proximo, altero, tertio, denique reliquis consecutis diebus non intermittebas quasi donum aliquod cotidie adferre rei publicae; maximum autem illud quod dictaturae nomen sustulisti. haec inusta est a te, a te, inquam, mortuo Caesari nota ad ignominiam sempiternam. Vt enim propter unius M. Manli scelus decreto gentis Manliae neminem patricium Manlium Marcum vocari licet, sic tu propter unius dictatoris odium nomen dictatoris funditus sustulisti.
Could it be, when you had done such great things for the safety of the commonwealth, that you were dissatisfied with your fortune, your eminence, your renown, your glory? Whence, then, on a sudden, so great a change? I cannot be brought to suspect that you were caught by money. Let each man say what he likes; one is not bound to believe. For I have never known anything sordid in you, anything low. Though, to be sure, intimates of one’s own household do sometimes deprave a man; but I know your firmness. And would that you could have avoided, as you avoided the fault, even the suspicion! What I fear more is this — that, in ignorance of the true road of glory, you may think it glorious to be more powerful, you alone, than all men together, and you may prefer to be feared by your countrymen than loved. If that is your thought, you are wholly ignorant of the road to glory. To be cherished as a fellow citizen, to deserve well of the commonwealth, to be praised, attended on, loved — that is glorious; but to be feared and an object of hatred is hateful, detestable, weak, and falling.
num te, cum haec pro salute rei publicae tanta gessisses, fortunae tuae, num amplitudinis, num claritatis, num gloriae paenitebat? Vnde igitur subito tanta ista mutatio? non possum adduci ut suspicer te pecunia captum. licet quod cuique libet loquatur, credere non est necesse. nihil enim umquam in te sordidum, nihil humile cognovi. quamquam solent domestici depravare non numquam; sed novi firmitatem tuam. atque utinam ut culpam, sic etiam suspicionem vitare potuisses! illud magis vereor ne ignorans verum iter gloriae gloriosum putes plus te unum posse quam omnis et metui a civibus tuis quam diligi malis. quod si ita putas, totam ignoras viam gloriae. Carum esse civem, bene de re publica mereri, laudari, coli, diligi gloriosum est; metui vero et in odio esse invidiosum, detestabile, imbecillum, caducum.
As we see, even in the play, was ruinous to that very man who said “oderint, dum metuant” — let them hate, so long as they fear. Would, Marcus Antonius, that you might remember your grandfather! And indeed you have heard much about him from me, and very often. Do you suppose that he wished to deserve immortal renown by being feared on account of his licence in bearing arms? That was a life, that was a happy fortune — to be the equal of others in liberty, the first in dignity. So that, to pass over your grandfather’s prosperous years, I should choose his most bitter last day rather than the despotism of Lucius Cinna, by whom he was most cruelly killed.
quod videmus etiam in fabula illi ipsi qui ‘ oderint, dum metuant’ dixerit perniciosum fuisse. Vtinam, M. Antoni, avum tuum meminisses! de quo tamen audisti multa ex me eaque saepissime. Putasne illum immortalitatem mereri voluisse, ut propter armorum habendorum licentiam metueretur? illa erat vita, illa secunda fortuna, libertate esse parem ceteris, principem dignitate. itaque, ut omittam res avi tui prosperas, acerbissimum eius supremum diem malim quam L. Cinnae dominatum, a quo ille crudelissime est interfectus.
But why should I sway you with words? For if the end of Gaius Caesar cannot bring it about that you would rather be loved than feared, nothing anyone says will profit or prevail. Those who think him to have been happy are themselves wretched. No man is happy who lives on such terms that he can be killed not only with impunity but even with the greatest glory to his killer. Therefore, bend yourself, I beg, and look back to your ancestors, and so steer the commonwealth that your countrymen shall rejoice that you were born: without which no man can be either happy or cherished or pleasing at all.
sed quid oratione te flectam? si enim exitus C. Caesaris efficere non potest ut malis carus esse quam metui, nihil cuiusquam proficiet nec valebit oratio. quem qui beatum fuisse putant, miseri ipsi sunt. beatus est nemo qui ea lege vivit ut non modo impune sed etiam cum summa interfectoris gloria interfici possit. qua re flecte te, quaeso, et maiores tuos respice atque ita guberna rem publicam ut natum esse te cives tui gaudeant: sine quo nec beatus nec carus nec iucundus quisquam esse omnino potest.
You both have many judgments from the Roman people, by which I bear it very ill that you are not sufficiently moved. What of the shouts of countless citizens at the gladiatorial games? What of the people’s verses? What of the boundless applause at Pompey’s statue? What of the two tribunes of the plebs who stand against you? Do these things not signify, beyond believing, the agreement of the whole Roman people? What? Did the applause at the Apollinarian games, or rather the testimonies and judgments of the Roman people, seem too small to you? O happy were those men who, when they themselves were not allowed to be present because of the force of arms, were yet present, and clung to the marrow and inward parts of the Roman people! Unless, perchance, you supposed that it was Accius who was being applauded then, and that the palm was being given in his sixtieth year and not to Brutus — Brutus, who in this way was absent from his own games, so that at that most lavishly appointed spectacle the Roman people might offer their zeal to a man not present, and might soothe their longing for their liberator with unbroken applause and shouting.
populi quidem Romani iudicia multa ambo habetis, quibus vos non satis moveri permoleste fero. quid enim gladiatoribus clamores innumerabilium civium? quid populi versus? quid Pompei statuae plausus infiniti? quid duobus tribunis plebis qui vobis adversantur? parumne haec significant incredibiliter consentientem populi Romani universi voluntatem? quid? Apollinarium ludorum plausus vel testimonia potius et iudicia populi Romani parum magna vobis videbantur? O beatos illos qui, cum adesse ipsis propter vim armorum non licebat, aderant tamen et in medullis populi Romani ac visceribus haerebant! Nisi forte Accio tum plaudi et sexagesimo post anno palmam dari, non Bruto putabatis, qui ludis suis ita caruit ut in illo apparatissimo spectaculo studium populus Romanus tribueret absenti, desiderium liberatoris sui perpetuo plausu et clamore leniret.
For my part I am one who has always despised that kind of applause when it was being offered to demagogue politicians; and yet when this same applause comes from the highest and middling and lowest, in short from all together, and when the men who used to follow the people’s agreement flee from it, I count it not applause but a judgment. But if these things, which are the gravest, seem light to you, do you despise this too — that you have felt how dear the life of Aulus Hirtius has been to the Roman people? For it was enough that he was approved by the Roman people, as he is; pleasing to his friends, in which he surpasses all; dear to his own people, to whom he himself is dearest: yet for whom do we remember so great a solicitude of the good men, so great a fear in all? Surely for no one.
equidem is sum qui istos plausus, cum popularibus civibus tribuerentur, semper contempserim; idemque cum a summis, mediis, infimis, cum denique ab universis hoc idem fit, cumque ei qui ante sequi populi consensum solebant fugiunt, non plausum illum, sed iudicium puto. sin haec leviora vobis videntur quae sunt gravissima, num etiam hoc contemnitis quod sensistis tam caram populo Romano vitam A. Hirti fuisse? satis erat enim probatum illum esse populo Romano, ut est; iucundum amicis, in quo vincit omnis; carum suis, quibus est ipse carissimus: tantam tamen sollicitudinem bonorum, tantum timorem omnium in quo meminimus? certe in nullo.
What then? By the immortal gods, do you not interpret what this means? What? Do you not suppose that those, in whose eyes the life of men they hope will look after the commonwealth is so dear, are thinking about your life? I have gathered, senators, the fruit of my return, since I have both said things such that, whatever the outcome might be, there should stand a witness of my constancy, and I have been kindly and attentively heard by you. If this power shall be given to me more often without peril to me or to you, I shall use it: if not, so far as I can, I shall keep myself in reserve, not so much for my own sake as for the commonwealth’s. For me what I have lived is roughly enough, whether for years or for glory: if anything is added to it, it shall be added not so much to me as to you and to the commonwealth.
quid igitur? hoc vos, per deos immortalis! quale sit non interpretamini? quid? eos de vestra vita cogitare non censetis quibus eorum quos sperant rei publicae consulturos vita tam cara sit? cepi fructum, patres conscripti, reversionis meae, quoniam et ea dixi, ut quicumque casus consecutus esset, exstaret constantiae meae testimonium, et sum a vobis benigne ac diligenter auditus. quae potestas si mihi saepius sine meo vestroque periculo fiet, utar: si minus, quantum potero, non tam mihi me quam rei publicae reservabo. mihi fere satis est quod vixi vel ad aetatem vel ad gloriam: huc si quid accesserit, non tam mihi quam vobis reique publicae accesserit.