Political Speeches (Oxford World's Classics) (52 page)

[110] And are you devoted to Caesar’s memory? Do you love him in his grave? Did he obtain any greater honour than to be granted a couch, a sacred image, a pediment on his house, a priest?
*
So the deified Julius, like Jupiter, like Mars, like Quirinus, has his priest—Marcus Antonius! What are you waiting for, then? Why have you not been inaugurated? Pick a date. Choose someone to inaugurate you. We are your colleagues:
*
no one will turn you down! But what a revolting creature you are, whether as the priest of a tyrant or of a corpse!

Next, I would like to ask you if you have forgotten what day it is today. Don’t you know that yesterday was the fourth day of the Roman Games in the circus?
*
And that you yourself carried a law in the assembly stipulating that a fifth day should be added in Caesar’s honour? Why, then, are we not in holiday attire? Why are we allowing the honour granted to Caesar by your law to be disregarded? Can you have allowed, by your addition of a day, the thanksgivings to the gods to be polluted, and yet have been unwilling to see their couches similarly polluted?
*
Either get rid of religion altogether or preserve it in every particular!

[111] You ask whether I approve of the couch, the pediment on his house, the priest. I do not approve of them for a moment; but can you, who defend Caesar’s acts, explain why you defend some of them, but disregard others? Of course, you may prefer simply to admit that you weigh up everything not according to Caesar’s honour, but according to your own profit.

So how are you going to reply? I am waiting to hear your eloquence. I knew your grandfather
*
to be a fine speaker, but you have a still more open manner of speaking. After all, he never addressed a public meeting in the nude,
*
whereas you, simple creature that you are, unburdened yourself before our very eyes! Are you going to reply to me? Are you going to dare open your mouth at all? Are you going to find a single point from this very lengthy speech of mine that you feel confident enough to answer?

[112] But all those matters are in the past: let us leave them aside. This one day, this single day, today, this moment of time at which
I am speaking: defend it, if you can. Why is the senate encircled by a ring of armed men? Why are your henchmen listening to me sword in hand? Why are the doors of the temple of Concord not standing open?
*
Why are you bringing the most barbarian of peoples, Ituraeans, into the forum armed with bows and arrows? He says it is for his own protection. But surely it is preferable to die a thousand times over than to be unable to live in one’s own country without an armed guard? And believe me, an armed guard is no protection: you would do better to be surrounded by the love and support of your fellow-citizens than by arms. [113] The Roman people will snatch those arms and wrest them from your grasp. I only hope we do not perish in the attempt!

But whatever you do to us, so long as you pursue your present policies, believe me, you cannot last long. For too long now has that most ungrasping of women, your wife—I mean no disrespect—owed her third instalment
*
to the Roman people. The Roman people have men
*
to whom they can entrust the helm of the state: wherever in the world they are, there is the entire defence of the state—or, rather, there
is
the state, which so far has only avenged itself, not restored itself. The state certainly has young men
*
of the highest rank ready to fight in its defence. Let them stay away as long as they wish, in the interests of peace: the state will call them back. Even the name of peace is sweet, and peace itself is a blessing; but there is all the difference in the world between peace and servitude. Peace is the quiet enjoyment of freedom, whereas servitude is the greatest of all evils, something to be resisted not just with war, but even with death.

[114] But if those liberators of ours have removed themselves from our sight, they have at least left behind the example of what they have done. They have done what no one ever did before. Brutus made war on Tarquinius,
*
who was king in the days when kings were permitted at Rome. Spurius Cassius, Spurius Maelius, and Marcus Manlius were all killed because they were suspected of having regal aspirations. But these men were the first to take up swords not against an aspirant to regal power, but against a ruling king. And just as their action is splendid and godlike on its own, so it is available for imitation—especially as they thereby acquired a glory which heaven itself seems scarcely able to contain. For though the awareness of having done so noble a deed was sufficient reward in itself, even so I do not think that mortals have the right to despise immortality.

[115] Therefore remember, Marcus Antonius, the day on which you abolished the dictatorship.
*
Place before your eyes the joy of the senate and people of Rome. Now compare that with this marketing conducted by you and persons close to you,
*
and you will appreciate what a gulf lies between profit and praise. But just as people who suffer from the numbness of sensation brought on by a disease are incapable of tasting food, so, I am sure, the lustful, the greedy, and the criminal cannot savour real praise. All right, then: if the prospect of praise cannot induce you to do right, cannot even fear call you away from your filthy actions? You are not afraid of the courts. If that is because you are innocent, then I approve. But if it is because you rely on violence, then you evidently do not appreciate that a person like that who has no fear of the courts has something else that he ought to be afraid of.
*
[116] And if you are not afraid of brave men and loyal citizens because they are kept from you by force of arms, then, believe me, your own supporters will not tolerate you for long.
*

And what sort of a life is it to live in fear, day and night, of one’s own supporters? Unless, of course, you have bound yours to you by acts of greater generosity than Caesar did in the case of certain of his assassins who were
his
supporters—if, that is, you can be compared to that man in any way at all! He had innate ability, strategic skill, a good memory, literary talent, a painstaking nature, an intelligent mind, and a capacity for hard work. His achievements in war, though catastrophic for Rome, were nevertheless great. Having aimed at monarchy for many years, he undertook great labours and ran great risks, and so achieved his goal. He won over the ignorant masses with shows, building projects, largesses, and banquets. His followers he bound to him by rewards, his opponents by an apparent clemency. In short, he succeeded in bringing a free country, partly because of its fear, partly because of its passivity, to an acceptance of servitude. [117] You I can compare to him only in lust for power; in all other respects you do not bear comparison with him.

But out of the many evils which Caesar inflicted on our country, there has come one good thing: the Roman people have now learned how far they can trust each person, whom they can rely on, and whom they should beware of. Do you not reflect on this—and realize that for brave men it is enough to have learned how noble in the act, how popular in the benefit it confers, and how glorious in the fame it brings is the assassination of a tyrant? Or do you imagine that, when
people could not endure Caesar, they will put up with you? [118] Mark my words, from now on it will be a race to carry out the task: the lack of an opportunity will be no reason for delay.

Look back, I ask you, Marcus Antonius, look back at last on your country. Think of the people from whom you are sprung, not of those with whom you live. With me, do as you will: only make your peace with your country. But that is for you; I shall speak for myself. I defended this country when I was a young man: I shall not desert it now that I am old. I faced down the swords of Catiline: I shall not flinch before yours. Yes, and I would willingly offer my body, if the freedom of this country could at once be secured by my death, and the suffering of the Roman people at last be delivered of that with which it has so long been pregnant. [119] If nearly twenty years ago in this very temple I declared that death could not be untimely for a man who had reached the consulship,
*
with how much more truth could I now say ‘for an old man’? In fact, for me, conscript fathers, death is actually desirable now that I have discharged the responsibilities of the offices I attained and completed the tasks I undertook. Two things alone I long for: first, that when I die I may leave the Roman people free—the immortal gods could bestow on me no greater blessing; and second, that each person’s fate may reflect the way he has behaved towards his country.

Notes are cued to section numbers in the text. For recurring terms see the Glossary.

your order
: the senatorial order.

Gaius Verres
: Cicero’s custom in his speeches is to refer to his enemy by name as infrequently as possible, unless for special effect; normally expressions such as ‘that man’ (
iste
) are preferred. In this speech, Verres is referred to by name only nine times. I have tried to retain something of this reticence in the translation, though it has often been necessary to name Verres where Cicero does not (I do so nineteen times). Here Cicero does name Verres, for effect.

which we both share
: since Cicero was a senator too.

an embezzler … city jurisdiction
: Verres served under Gnaeus Papirius Carbo in Cisalpine Gaul in 83, but stole his military treasury and deserted him for Sulla; he plundered Asia and Pamphylia (part of the province of Cilicia) while serving under Gnaeus Cornelius Dolabella in 80–79, against whom he testified at the latter’s extortion trial in 78 (Dolabella was convicted); and he allegedly sold justice while city praetor at Rome in 74 (
praedonem
, ‘cheater’, is Cicero’s clever substitution for the similar-sounding
praetorem
, ‘praetor’).

Manius Glabrio
: Manius Acilius Glabrio, the presiding magistrate. This passage suggests that the defence were hostile to Glabrio, which helps account for their eagerness to have the trial prolonged into 69 (cf. § 29). He may therefore have favoured Cicero; at any rate he allowed him to deviate from the normal procedure in his prosecution. Glabrio went on to be consul in 67, supporting his colleague Gaius Calpurnius Piso’s law against electoral malpractice, and then briefly became commander in Bithynia and Pontus in 66 before being superseded by Pompey. He was possibly censor in 64. For an account of his connections and likely political opinions (not an optimate, and probably no friend of the Metelli), see L. Hayne,
CP
69 (1974), 280–2. On his family connections, see also §§ 51–2 below, with notes.

he found someone … to Achaea
: Cicero is reticent about the details of this other extortion trial, which delayed his own prosecution by three months (
Ver
. 2.1.30). B. A. Marshall (
Philologus
, 121 (1977), 83–9) has argued that the prosecutor in that trial may have been Quintus Caecilius Metellus Nepos (consul in 57) and the defendant Gaius Scribonius Curio, the governor of Macedonia from 75 to 72 who is mentioned below at § 18
(where see note); Achaea fell under the supervision of the governor of Macedonia.

in fact … as far as Brundisium!
: perhaps an assistant was sent instead.

the rejection of jurors
: before the trial began, both sides had the right to reject some of the jurors that had been assigned to the case; we know only that a non-senator could reject no more than three. Cicero says that it was obvious to those present (the Roman people) that the jurors Verres chose to reject were those of unimpeachable honesty, whom he would have no chance of bribing.

what eloquence or fluency great enough
: Cicero is thinking of Hortensius (as he was at §9 ‘if he had had the slightest confidence … in anyone’s eloquence’). It suits his purpose to make much of Hortensius’ powers of persuasion.

by his own quaestor
: for the events referred to in this paragraph, see third note on §2 above. Cicero emphasizes the special, enduring loyalty which a quaestor was expected to show towards the senior magistrate (consul or governor) to whom he had been assigned by lot (for a study of this loyalty, see L. A. Thompson,
Historia
, 11 (1962), 339–55); Verres betrayed both Carbo and Dolabella.

our own victorious generals
: after destroying Carthage in 146, Scipio Aemilianus returned to Sicily all the statues which the Carthaginians had taken from it (
Ver
. 2.4.73–4).

when the lots were cast
: i.e. the lots to decide which members of the panel assigned to the case should be selected as jurors; this was the penultimate stage in the selection of the jury, the final stage being the rejection of a set number of jurors by both prosecution and defence (see first note on §10 above).

any mark … on the voting-tablets
: since jurors voted by secret ballot and the voting-tablets were identical, any attempt at bribery would depend on the tablets (which were coated with wax) being marked in some way, so that the bribery-agent could check that the jurors he had bribed had fulfilled their part of the bargain.

since the consular elections
: at which Hortensius and Quintus Caecilius Metellus were elected consuls for 69.

Gaius Curio
: Gaius Scribonius Curio, consul of 76, governor of Macedonia from 75 to 72, and later censor in 61. We can infer from what follows that he was a supporter of Verres (both had done well out of Sulla’s proscriptions). In 61 he supported Clodius against Cicero; Cicero wrote a pamphet attacking him, and later tried to deny authorship of it when he was in exile and needed Curio’s support. See W. C. McDermott,
AJP
93 (1972), 381–411 for a history of the relations between the two men. On the possibility that Curio was the defendant whose trial for extortion delayed Cicero’s prosecution of Verres, see first note on §6 above.

the Arch of Fabius
: the triumphal arch of Quintus Fabius Maximus
Allobrogicus (consul in 121), erected in
c
. 120 to commemorate Fabius’ victory over the Allobroges and other tribes in Gaul. It was the first triumphal arch in or near the forum, and stood near the entry to the forum on the Sacred Way. Its inscriptions were discovered in the sixteenth century, but have since been lost.