Civil Wars

"We did not vote the governorship of Cisalpine Gaul to Antony. The people gave it to him by a law, Cicero being present; just as other provinces had often been given, and as this same governorship had previously been given to Cæsar. It was a part of this law that, when Antony should arrive at the province given to him, if Decimus would not yield it Antony should declare war and lead the army into the Gallic province against him, instead of using it against the Thracians, who were still quiet. But Cicero does not consider Decimus, who is bearing arms against the law, an enemy, although he considers Antony an enemy who is fighting in accordance with law. He who accuses the law itself accuses the authors of the law, whom he ought to change by persuasion, not to insult after having himself agreed with them.[*](This is absurd and impossible. The Epitome of Livy (cxvii.) says that the law for the exchange of provinces was passed by Antony by violence. It was probably among those mentioned by Cicero in the fifth Philippic (3 and 4) as passed under military compulsion and in violation of the auspices. Not only was a tremendous thunder-storm raging "so that Jove himself seemed to be prohibiting it by clamor from the skies," but the approaches to the forum were so fenced in "that it would have been impossible to gain entrance without tearing down the barricade even if no armed soldiers had stood in the way.") He ought not to intrust the province to Decimus, whom the people drove out of the city on account of the murder, while refusing to intrust to Antony what the people gave to him. It is not the part of good counsellors to be at variance with the people, especially in times of danger, or to forget that this very power of deciding who are friends and who are enemies formerly belonged to the people. According to the ancient laws the people are the sole arbiters of peace and war. Heaven grant that they may not be reminded of this, and consequently be angry with us when they have found a leader.

"But it is said that Antony put certain soldiers to death. Being commander-in-chief he was empowered to do so by you. No commander has ever rendered an account of such matters. The laws do not consider it expedient that the general should be answerable to his soldiers. There is nothing worse in an army than disobedience, on account of which some soldiers have been put to death even after a victory, and no one called to account those who killed them. None of their relatives complain now, but Cicero complains and while accusing Antony of murder stigmatizes him as a public enemy, instead of calling for the punishment prescribed for murderers. The desertion of two of his legions shows how insubordinate and arrogant Antony's army was--which legions you had voted that he should command, and who deserted, in violation of military law, not to you, but to Octavius. Nevertheless Cicero praised them and yesterday proposed that they be paid out of the public treasury. Heaven grant that this example may not plague you hereafter. Hatred has betrayed Cicero into inconsistency, for he accused Antony of aiming at supreme power and yet punishing his soldiers, whereas such conspirators are always lenient, not severe, toward the men serving under them. As Cicero does not hesitate to arraign as tyrannical all the rest of Antony's administration since Cæsar's death, come, let me examine his acts one by one.

"Whom has Antony put to death in a tyrannical manner without trial--he who is now in danger of being condemned unheard? Whom has he banished from the city? Whom has he slandered in our presence? Or, if innocent toward us individually, has he conspired against all of us collectively? When, O Cicero? Was it when he carried through the Senate the act of amnesty for the past? Was it when he abstained from prosecuting anybody for the murder? Was it when he moved an investigation of the public moneys? Was it when he proposed the recall of Sextus Pompey, the son of your Pompey, and payment for his father's confiscated property out of the public treasury? Was it when he seized that conspirator, the false Marius, and put him to death, and you all applauded? And because you did so it was the only act of Antony that Cicero did not calumniate. Was it when he brought in a decree that nobody should ever propose a dictatorship, or vote for it, and that anybody disobeying the decree might be killed with impunity by any one who wished? These are the public acts that Antony performed for us during two months the only months that he remained in the city after Cæsar's death, the very time when the people were pursuing the murderers and you were apprehensive of the future. If he were a villain what better opportunity could he have had? But it is said that he was not in a condition to do otherwise.[*](a)ll' e)s ta\ e)nanti/a ou)k h)=rxe, an obscure sentence. Combes-Dounous suggested h)/rkei in place of h)=rxe, a change approved by Bekker and Mendelssohn.) How? Did he not exercise the sole authority after Dolabella departed for Syria? Did he not have an armed force in readiness in the city, one that you gave him ? Did he not patrol the city by night ? Was he not guarded at night against any conspiracy of his enemies? Did he not have an excuse for this in the murder of Cæsar, his friend and benefactor, the man most beloved by the common people ? Did he not have another of a personal kind in the fact that the murderers conspired against his life also? None of them did he kill or banish, but pardoned them what he could in decency, and did not begrudge them the governorships that were offered to them. Ye behold then, O Romans, these very grave and indisputable charges of Cicero against Antony.

" Since, in addition to charges, surmises are introduced to the effect that Antony was about to lead an army to the city, but became alarmed because Octavius had anticipated him with another army, how does it happen that when the mere intention to do this makes a man an enemy the one who actually comes and encamps alongside of us without authority is not considered an enemy? What would have prevented Antony from coming if he had wanted to? With 30,000 troops in line was he afraid of Octavius' 3000, half-armed, unorganized, who had come together merely to gain his friendship, and who left him as soon as they knew that he had chosen them for war? If Antony was afraid to come with 30,000 how did he dare to come with only 1000? With these what a crowd of us accompanied him to Tibur! What a crowd of us voluntarily joined the soldiers in taking the oath of fidelity to him! What praises did Cicero lavish on his acts and virtues! If Antony himself contemplated any such thing [as invasion] why did he leave as pledges in our hands his mother, his wife, and his grown up son, who are even now at the door of the Senate weeping and fearful, not on account of what Antony has done, but on account of the overwhelming power of his enemies.

"These facts furnish you an example of Antony's defence and of Cicero's fickleness. I will add an exhortation to right-minded men, not to do injustice to the people or to Antony, not to expose the public interests to new enmities and dangers while the commonwealth is sick and in want of timely defenders, but to establish a sufficient force in the city to ward off danger before breeding disorder outside, to provide against attacks from every quarter, and to come to such decisions as you please when you are able to carry them into effect. How shall these ends be accomplished? By allowing Antony, as a matter of policy, or for the sake of the people, to have Cisalpine Gaul. Call Decimus thence with his three legions, and when he comes send him to Macedonia, retaining his legions here. If the two legions that deserted from Antony deserted to us, as Cicero says, let us summon them also from Octavius to the city. Thus with five legions sustaining us we might pass such decrees as we think best with entire confidence, depending on the favor of no man.

" I have addressed these words to men who listen to me without malice or the spirit of contention. Those who would excite you heedlessly and inconsiderately on account of private enmity and private strife I exhort not to come to hasty and rash decisions against the most important personages, who command strong armies, and not to force them into war against their will. Remember Marcius Coriolanus. Recall the recent doings of Cæsar, whom we rashly voted an enemy while he was in like manner leading an army and offering us the fairest terms of peace, whereby we forced him to be an enemy in fact. Have regard for the people who were lately pursuing Cæsar's murderers, lest we seem to insult them by giving those murderers the governorship of provinces, by praising Decimus for nullifying the people's law, and by voting Antony an enemy because he accepted the Gallic province from the people. For which reasons the well-wishers of the country ought to take thought for the erring, and the consuls and tribunes ought to be more than ever careful in view of the public dangers."[*](Piso was the father of Cæsar's wife, Calpurnia. It is very doubtful whether this speech, or any other in defence of Antony, was made by him. Cicero tells us in the first Philippic (4, 6, and 7) that Piso made a strong speech on the first of August on the republican side. In a letter to Cassius (Ad Fam. xii. 2) he says that Piso is one of three senators whose blood Antony is seeking, the other two being P. Servilius and Cicero himself. It must be said, however, that Piso was capable of changing at any moment, for a blacker character never was painted than that which Cicero gives him in his Orations De Provinciis Consularibus and In Pisonem. Dion Cassius (xlvi. 1-28) says that Quintus Fufius Calenus took the lead in defending Antony in this debate. In the eighth Philippic (4-6) Cicero addresses himself to Fufius and answers arguments which the latter had made in favor of Antony in some debate. At an earlier period Fufius had been tribune and had fixed the jury which acquitted Clodius when he was tried for profaning the mysteries of the Bona Dea.)