Five of the ringleaders of the conspiracy were
apprehended
and detained.
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome_nodrm
Why, then, do you suppose some contemporary critics consider it "nai?
ve" to accept his account of Aspasia?
Do you see anything in the document that would lead you to believe you are being "prevent[ed] .
.
.
from understanding who she was and what her contributions to Greek thought might have been"?
e Plato's dialogue Menexenus is relatively short, and most of it is com- prised of the funeral oration that (according to Plato) Aspasia wrote and Socrates recited. Read Aspasia's speech. Does it sound convincing? Is it well organized? Based only on this speech, would you say that Aspasia deserved her apparently solid reputation as a philosopher and rhetorician?
e As mentioned above, ancient historians, biographers, and other nonfic- tion authors never cited their sources in formats with which we are famil- iar today: bibliographies, footnotes, quotation marks, parenthetical citations, and the like. And they certainly never asked, formally or other- wise, for permission to use or quote material from another author's books in their own work. Apparently, these authors, and the scholarly commu- nity in general, believed that no one could "own" words, ideas, and infor- mation, and therefore, it would be ludicrous to ask permission of, or to offer payment to, another author for the use of his written material. Things are different these days, where copyright laws and antiplagiarism
? ? ? ? ? ASPASIA AS A MATCHMAKER
Among her many other talents, Aspasia was a noted matchmaker. According to the historian Xenophon (in Memorabilia), Socrates once solicited her thoughts on this topic. She responded by stating that above all, a matchmaker has to be certain that she does not misrepresent the qualities or personalities of the people whom she is trying to match. For if she conveys inaccurate or false information, not only will the poorly matched cou- ple hate each other; they will hate the matchmaker, too, which in turn, obviously would damage the match- maker's reputation.
? ? 162
guidelines have combined to form rigid citation and permission rules to which nonfiction authors must adhere. Which system do you think is superior? Why?
e Plutarch says that Pericles persuaded the Assembly to pass a decree authorizing Athenian military action against the island of Samos (off the western coast of Ionia), because the Samians had disobeyed an Athenian order to end their war against the city of Miletus. (The two of them were fighting over possession of Priene, another city in Ionia. ) Some Athenians believed that Aspasia was responsible for fomenting Athenian involve- ment in this conflict. Why would that suspicion have arisen? Does it make sense?
Further Information
Henry, Madeleine M. Prisoner of History: Aspasia of Miletus and Her Biographical Tradition. Oxford, 1995.
Radice, Betty. Who's Who in the Ancient World (s. v. "Aspasia"). Baltimore, 1973. Websites
Aspasia. http://www. newworldencyclopedia. org/entry/Aspasia
Aspasia biography. http://www. yourdictionary. com/biography/aspasia
Aspasia of Miletus. http://penelope. uchicago. edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/greece/
hetairai/aspasia. html
Bibliography for Document
Bury, The Rev. R. G. (tr. ). Plato: Timaeus; Critias; Cleitophon; Menexenus, Epistles. [LCL. ] London and Cambridge, 1929.
Scott-Kilvert, Ian (tr. ). Plutarch: The Rise and Fall of Athens: Nine Greek Lives. New York, 1960.
Women in Politics? In Ancient Athens?
? ? ? ? ASPASIA AS AN AUTHOR
Aspasia was reputedly the author of not one, but two, funeral orations, including perhaps the most famous such oration of all: the one that Pericles delivered after the first year of fighting in the Peloponnesian War, in which, among other things, he declared that Athens was the "school of Greece. " She receives credit for authoring the second one by no less an authority than Plato, in his dialogue Menexenus. The title character and Socrates are discussing the art of crafting and delivering such a speech: "Menexenus: And do you think that you yourself would be able to make the speech, if required . . . Socrates: That I should be able to make the speech would be nothing [surprising], Menexenus. For she who is my instructor is by no means weak in the art of rhetoric. On the contrary, she has turned out many fine orators, and amongst them one who surpassed all other Greeks, Pericles, the son of Xanthippus. Menexenus: Who is she? But you mean Aspasia, no doubt. Socrates: I do. " [Plato. Menexenus 235 E; 236 A. tr. Bury. ] Socrates goes on to explain that on the previous day, he had heard Aspasia rehearsing a funeral speech that she was preparing. Some of it she had already written; other parts of it she was making up on the spot, and she was doing all of this at the same time she was working on Pericles's funeral oration. Socrates apparently had a copy of the first speech, and Menexenus prevailed upon him to recite it. The rest of the dialogue is taken up with Socrates's presentation of Aspasia's speech.
? ? 163
This page intentionally left blank
32. HOMEGROWN TERRORISM?
INTRODUCTION
First-century BCE Roman politics was as well documented as it was muddled. We have more first-hand literary sources of information about that century than any other in Roman--or Greek--history. It was a time of egomaniacal military and political leaders, whose goals seemed to include domination of the Roman government, and also a time of idealistic individuals determined to stop them. It was a time of shifting political alliances and shifting friendships, changes that seemed to happen weekly . . . or daily . . . or even hourly. The dynamic of the century could be well summarized by one of its most famous events: the assassination of Julius Caesar, in 44 BCE As the circle of almost two dozen conspirators closed around him on the Ides of March, and each one delivered a knife thrust, the mortally wounded Caesar recognized the faces of several men whom he thought were his friends, including Brutus. Young Brutus, his prote? ge? . No wonder Caesar was struck with disbelief--"even you, Brutus? "--at being stabbed in the back, both literally and figuratively, by a friend. Or was he a friend? First century Roman politicians who wanted to survive needed to know who their friends were.
One of the most famous--or infamous--Roman politicians of the time was the dis- appointed office-seeker Lucius Sergius Catilina, better known today as Catiline. Catiline had been a provincial governor (in Africa) in 66, and at the close of his tenure there, he returned to Rome, hoping to run for election to the top office in the Roman government, the consulship. However, irregularities in his African administration pre- cluded his candidacy. He was put on trial for provincial mismanagement, acquitted, and again decided to run for the consulship, this time in 64. He lost. He tried again the next year, and lost again. Now, in effect a three-time loser, Catiline began to search for a more direct, less constitutional, method to gain power: a military coup, which he began organizing toward the end of the year 63. He eventually amassed a large army of followers, over 10,000, and his plot might have worked had not one man gotten in the way, one of the duly elected consuls for 63, the famous orator, lawyer, and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero.
Cicero found out about Catiline's plot, and exposed it in a memorable series of four speeches, delivered near the end of 63. The document consists of the first several paragraphs of his first speech against Catiline, on November 7, 63.
? ? 165
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
? KEEP IN MIND AS YOU READ
1. The Roman Senate was not an elected, legislative body, like the United States Senate, but instead was composed of nonelected statesmen and politicians, drawn from the ranks of former officeholders, who remained senators for life. Its numbers fluctuated, but generally hovered around 300. The Senate's primary role was advi- sory (although its advice was taken seriously, given the composition of its member- ship), but it also exercised some control over financial matters and foreign policy issues. The Senate met when convened by a consul, and Cicero had good reason to call a meeting for November 7: he had been the target of a failed assassination plot engineered by Catiline!
2. Catiline himself had the audacity to attend the November 7 Senate meeting, even though he must have known, or at least suspected, that he was about to be denounced by one of the most eloquent orators of all time. It is uncertain whether Catiline delivered a rebuttal; there is some indication that he made an effort to deny the charges. Or, as some believe, he may have simply walked out of the temple where the meeting took place without attempting to make a reply. It does seem clear, however, that he was shunned by the senators and took a seat by himself during Cicero's speech, well apart from the others.
3. One of the interesting, if unanswerable, questions about Cicero's speech is whether he had a written text of it or simply delivered it extemporaneously. It seems unlikely that he carried a manuscript, or even notes, with him to address the Senate; Roman (and Greek) orators always used elaborate and vigorous arm and hand gestures during their speeches, and it is difficult to envision an orator encumbered by sheets or rolls of paper being able to perform the appropriate gestures. Cicero probably had prepared and rehearsed the speech in advance, rather than making it up as he went along, but he almost certainly did not read it.
4. Like modern attorneys, Cicero bases many of his arguments on legal and historical precedents.
Document: When Cicero Speaks, People
Listen!
In the name of heaven, Catiline, how long do you propose to exploit our patience? Do you really suppose that your lunatic activities are going to escape our retaliation for evermore? Are there to be no limits to this audacious, uncontrollable swaggering? Look at the garrison of our Roman nation which guards the Palatine by night, look at the patrols ranging the city, the whole population gripped by terror, the entire body of loyal citizens massing at one single spot!
Look at this meeting of our Senate behind strongly fortified defenses, see the expressions on the countenances of every one of these men who are here! Have none of these sights made the smallest impact on your heart? You must be well aware that your plot has been detected. Now that every single person in this place knows all about your conspiracy, you cannot fail to realize it is doomed. Do you suppose there is a single individual here who has not got
? ? 166
A group of senators outside the Temple of Jupiter, Roman, fourth century CE. (Louvre, Paris, France/ Alinari/The Bridgeman Art Library)
the very fullest information about what you were doing last night and the night before, where you went, the men you summoned, the plans you concocted?
What a scandalous commentary on our age and its standards! For the senate knows all about these things. The consul sees them being done. And yet this man still lives! Lives? He walks right into the Senate. He joins in our national debates--watches and notes and marks down with his gaze each one of us he plots to assassinate. And we, how brave we are! Just by getting out of the way of his frenzied onslaught, we feel we are doing patriotic duty enough.
But yours was the death which the consul should have ordered long ago. The calamity which you have long been planning for each one of us ought to have rebounded on to yourself alone. The noble Publius Scipio Nasica, who was chief priest but held no admin- istrative office, killed Tiberius Gracchus, although his threat to the national security was only on a limited scale [unlike the much more serious danger posed by
Homegrown Terrorism?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? chief priest: As the title suggests, the pontifex maximus (chief priest) was in charge of official religious func- tions and supervisor of all priests in Rome. Although the responsibilities of the chief priest were mostly reli- gious, there was also a political dimension: the chief priest had to be elected, which necessitated a political campaign--but only once, because he held the position for life.
consul: Remember, there were two con- suls each year. It is not totally clear whether Cicero is referring to him- self here or to the other consul for the year, Gaius Antonius Hybrida. (Interestingly, Hybrida was once thought to have Catilinarian
? ? ? 167
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
Catiline]. Shall we, then, who hold the office of consuls, tolerate Catiline when he is determined to plunge the world into fire and slaughter? Upon precedents that go too far back into antiquity, such as the act of Gaius Servilius Ahala who with his own hand slew Spurius Maelius for plotting a revolution, I shall not dwell, except to say that at former epochs, in this country of ours, brave men did not lack the courage to strike down a dangerous Roman citizen more fiercely even than they struck down the bitterest of foreign foes. Moreover, we have in our hands, Catiline, a decree of the Senate that is specifically aimed against yourself, and a formidable and stern decree it is. From this body, then, the state has no lack of counsel and authority. I tell you frankly, it is we, the consuls, who are not doing our duty. [Tr. Michael Grant. Selected Political Speeches of Cicero. (Against Lucius Sergius Catilina. I. 1-3. ) Penguin Classics, 1969. Page numbers: 76, 77. ]
AFTERMATH
Catiline stormed out of the Senate meeting after the speech and left Rome to join up with his revolutionary army, which was quartered not far away. The next day, November 8, Cicero made a speech to the general population outlining the situation and trying to prevent panic. Meanwhile, the conspirators who remained in Rome after Catiline's abrupt departure on the 7th imprudently divulged their plans to some ambassadors from Gaul (modern France) who hap- pened to be in the city; apparently, the conspirators were hoping that the ambassadors would provide them with additional man- power and supplies. But instead, the Gauls reported the information to Cicero, replete with written documentation. It was precisely the break he needed!
Five of the ringleaders of the conspiracy were apprehended and detained. On December 3, Cicero delivered his third Catilinarian oration, directly to the Roman people, in which he explained the most recent developments in the case against Catiline. Two days later, the Roman Senate debated the issue; during this debate, Cicero brought forth his fourth and final oration against Catiline. The Senate voted for execution, and the sentence was carried out immediately, with Cicero's support and supervision. (Although the Senate's vote did not have the force of law, such was that body's in- fluence in Roman politics that Cicero, and others, would have felt comfortable in interpreting a senatorial decree as tantamount to legal sanction for his actions. )
For the next 20 years of his life, until he was killed in 43, Cicero looked back with pride on his role in suppressing the
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? sympathies, but Cicero gained his support by promising to help him obtain a desirable province to gov- ern after his term as consul had expired. )
the consul should have ordered:
Here, Cicero seems to be referenc- ing himself, not his colleague Hybrida. In October 63, the Senate had passed a resolution con- ferring wide-ranging powers upon the consuls for the protection of the state in an emergency. (This was the senatus consultum ultimum, often abbreviated as S. C. U. , or "final decree of the Senate," some- what similar to martial law in our own times. Such a decree empow- ered the consuls to order execu- tions of individuals deemed to pose a serious danger to the state. )
decree of the Senate: The senatus con- sultum ultimum, mentioned above. the expressions on the countenances: According to Ciceronian commen- tator Albert Harkness, Cicero is here referring to the "looks of sur- prise and indignation with which the senate received Catiline as he
took his seat . . . "
Gaius Servilius Ahala: As he himself
admits, Cicero is reaching far back into Roman history for this prec- edent: 439 BCE. Spurius Maelius was a wealthy plebeian who, at a time of famine and food shortages, was able to devote his own resources to the provision of cheap corn for his starving fellow countrymen. This altruistic action stirred suspicions among the leaders of the Roman government that Spurius was in reality trying to court popular favor, so as to position himself for a run at royal power. Accordingly, the government sent their representative Ahala to deal with Spurius, and deal
? ? ? ? ? 168
Catilinarian conspiracy as the time when he almost single- handedly saved the Roman state. But his political enemies con- demned him for his actions in this case, because he ordered the summary execution of the five men without giving them an opportunity to appeal their death sentences, as required by Roman law.
ASK YOURSELF
1. Why do you suppose Catiline showed up at this meeting of the Roman Senate when he very likely knew that his plot was going to be exposed, and that he himself might be in physical danger?
2. Cicero refers to Publius Scipio Nasica as a vir amplissimus--a very distinguished man. Can we infer from those complimentary words that Cicero approved of Nasica's actions in leading the crowd of senators who struck down Tiberius Gracchus? Would that incident be sound precedent for Cicero to push ahead for the death penalty for the five conspirators?
3. Could Catiline be aptly described as a "home-grown terror- ist"? Why or why not?
TOPICS TO CONSIDER
e Although Catiline's conspiracy certainly posed an imminent threat to the Roman government, and its leading officeholders, especially Cicero, some historians have argued that Cicero's speech against Catiline contains elements of exaggeration. Could you identify any places in the document where Cicero seems to be going a bit overboard in what he says?
e Ciceroargueddozensofcourtcasesandmadedoz- ens of public speeches during his long career as a lawyer and orator. In court, he excelled both as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney, but he was probably more sharp-tongued when on the offen- sive, as he is in the speech against Catiline. Can you find examples in the document where Cicero seems to be sarcastic? Or instances where he engages in personal attacks?
e When the Senate engaged in its momentous December 5 debate on the fate of the five cap- tured conspirators, the first 16 speakers all argued in favor of the death penalty. The 17th speaker, however, suggested that they simply be imprisoned for life, and such was his eloquence that
Homegrown Terrorism?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? he did: he killed him. Spurius's true motives, therefore, are unknown. But Cicero makes it clear what he thought Spurius was up to.
last night and the night before:
Cicero may be referring, in part, to a meeting of the conspirators in which they discussed the details of assassinating him.
Palatine: The Palatine Hill, one of Rome's famous Seven Hills, was home to some of the city's wealthiest residents, who lived in exquisite mansions; our English words "pal- ace" and "palatial" derive from Palatine. The fact that the Palatine had to be patrolled by armed guards indicates the seriousness of the situa- tion caused by Catiline's conspiracy.
Publius Cornelius Scipio: Nasica was one of the consuls in 138 BCE. A short time later, in the turbulent year of 133, when the tribune Tiberius Gracchus had proposed a highly controversial land redistribu- tion measure, Nasica was a leader of the opposition. When Gracchus announced that he would run for reelection to the tribunate--a very nontraditional decision, given that the tribunes were term-limited to one year--Nasica demanded that the consuls take action to stop him. When they refused, Nasica led a band of senators, who were equipped with clubs and heavy sticks, to one of Gracchus's cam- paign rallies, with the apparent intention of taking matters into their own hands. Things quickly turned ugly; violence broke out, and Gracchus was killed. The biog- rapher Plutarch writes that this was the first time in all of Roman his- tory that the blood of citizens was shed in a civil disturbance.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? 169
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
Further Information
the Senate was at least temporarily inclined to go along with that proposal. That speaker's name: Julius Caesar. There has been speculation-- although no solid proof--that Caesar was at least a covert supporter of Catiline. Could this be true? If so, what reasons might Caesar have had for backing someone like Catiline?
e Imagine that you were given the assignment of defending Catiline in court. What arguments on his behalf could you present?
e Investigate the senatus consultum ultimum (S. C. U. ), "the final decree of the Senate. " Under what kinds of circumstances in Roman history had it been invoked prior to the trial of Catiline? What would be the modern equivalent of the S. C. U. ? Are there any similarities between ancient and modern usages of a decree like this?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? scandalous . . . standards: This is the translation given for one of Cicero's most famous utterances: O tempora! O mores! , more suc- cinctly rendered as "Oh, the times! Oh, the morals! "
strongly fortified defenses: This Senate meeting took place in the Temple of Jupiter Stator ("Protector"), which was located on the Palatine Hill, and which was guarded even in normal times. But in this situation, the temple guards were augmented by the patrols that Cicero had previously mentioned.
? ? ? Hutchinson, L. The Conspiracy of Catiline. New York, 1967.
Kaplan, A. Catiline: The Man and His Role in the Roman Revolution. New York, 1968. Odahl, Charles M. Cicero and the Catilinarian Conspiracy. New Haven, CT, 1971. Scullard, H. H. From the Gracchi to Nero: A History of Rome from 133 B. C. to A. D. 68.
London, 1959.
? ? ? ? THE ULTIMATE ANCIENT AUTHORITY ON CATILINE'S CONSPIRACY
Gaius Sallustius Crispus (86-34 BCE), commonly known today as Sallust, wrote a detailed historical account of the Catilinarian conspiracy. The treatise, which survives intact, contains 61 sections and covers all the important events: a description of Catiline's character; his plot and all its ramifications; the arrest of the five ringleaders; the debate over their punishment; their execution; the activities of Catiline's revolutionary army and its defeat; and the death of Catiline.
In addition to his writing career, Sallust was also a politician, orator, and lawyer. Interestingly, he was once matched up against Cicero, in a court case (52 BCE) involving Titus Annius Milo, on trial for murdering a politi- cal opponent; Cicero was the defense lawyer, Sallust assisted in the prosecution. The story goes that Sallust had a personal motive for joining in with the prosecution: some time before, he had been discovered in flagrante with Milo's wife, whereupon Milo publicly horse-whipped him for his adulterous behavior and, in addition, laid a heavy fine upon him.
As for the outcome of Milo's court case . . . the situation was so politically charged--the courtroom was surrounded with heavily armed guards--that Cicero never actually delivered any speeches in defense of his client, although the transcript still survives of the speech he would have made. Milo fled to Massilia (modern Marseilles in southern France) and enjoyed a brief "retirement" from the hurly-burly of Roman politics, until once again reprising his involvement, and ultimately being executed (48 BCE) for fomenting violence.
? ? 170
Websites
Catiline Biography. http://www. bookrags. com/biography/catiline
Catiline Conspiracy. http://www. unrv. com/roman-republic/catiline-conspiracy. php
Bibliography for Document
Artwork: The cover of this book displays a very famous painting that depicts Cicero excori- ating Catiline before the Roman Senate. Catiline sits off to one side, alone, depressed, and sulking. The painting is entitled Cicero Denounces Catiline, by Cesare Maccari (1840-1919), who created it in 1888.
Grant, Michael (tr. ). Selected Political Speeches of Cicero. New York, 1969.
Homegrown Terrorism?
171
This page intentionally left blank
33. THE WOMEN OF ROME REFUSE TO BACK DOWN
INTRODUCTION
Roman women were probably as politically disadvantaged as Greek women: they could not vote; they could not hold public office; they could not attend and participate in the gather- ings of the legislative bodies. And they usually could not take collective action to show their support for or displeasure with legal or political issues . . . usually.
But in 195 BCE, a striking exception occurred to the stay-at-home status to which most Roman women were restricted most of the time. In that year, a political debate was occur- ring about the possibility of repealing the Oppian Law of 215 BCE. This law, which was passed just after the disastrous Battle of Cannae (216) in the Second Punic War, placed severe restrictions on women's finery; specifically, it mandated that: (1) no woman could own more than a half ounce of gold; (2) no woman could wear multicolored clothing, espe- cially that which was trimmed with purple; (3) no woman could ride in horse-drawn car- riages, except during religious processions. The rationale for the passage of this law in 215 was probably that since Rome was in the midst of a desperate war against their bitter rival the city-state of Carthage, luxury goods had to be regulated, and perhaps even contributed to help fund the war effort. But by 195, the war was over, and so there was a concomitant longing for repeal of some of the restrictive wartime measures that had been enacted, includ- ing the Oppian Law. Accordingly, two tribunes, Marcus Fundanius and Lucius Valerius, proposed removing the law from the books. But two other tribunes, Marcus Junius Brutus and Publius Junius Brutus, threatened to veto the repeal effort, and that is when the sparks began to fly!
Our source for this chapter's fourth document, the historian Titus Livius (better known today as "Livy"), reports that when news of the veto threat spread, crowds of people flocked to the streets, both supporters and opponents of the repeal, to raucously make known their views. A large portion of the assemblage--astonishingly--was comprised of women! Angry, aggressive women. Livy says that they streamed out of their houses, even when for- bidden by their husbands to do so, and blocked the streets. They accosted the men who opposed repeal, bitterly complaining that since better times had returned with the end of the war, the need for sumptuary laws had vanished. Day after day, the street demonstrations continued, and even grew larger and more vocal as women from the countryside and nearby towns joined in. Their boldness increased commensurately; they took their arguments
? ? 173
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
directly to the leading officeholders of the government. The stage was set for a major public debate, filled with emotion and rancor.
KEEP IN MIND AS YOU READ
1. The Oppian Law was named for the politician who proposed it in 215, the tribune Gaius Oppius.
2. Although the crowds in the streets were both large and noisy (if Livy is to be believed), the formal debate about the fate of the Oppian Law involved only Marcus Porcius Cato (anti-repeal), Lucius Valerius (pro-repeal), and short, unre- corded speeches by the two tribunes who had threatened to veto the repeal.
3. Cato, the chief proponent and spokesman for the Oppian Law, was a formidable force in Roman politics for most of his adult life (he lived into his eighties). To openly oppose him on any issue would require a powerful mixture of fortitude, assertiveness, oratorical skill, and intelligence, and so it must have been a daunting task for someone like a mere tribune to take him on in a public debate. But Lucius Valerius seemed to be up to the task.
Document: Women in Roman Politics
Amid the anxieties of [a recently-ended great war], an incident occurred, trivial to relate, but which, by reason of the passions it aroused, developed into a violent con- tention. Marcus Fundanius and Lucius Valerius, trib- unes of the people, proposed to the [legislative] assembly the abrogation of the Oppian Law . .
e Plato's dialogue Menexenus is relatively short, and most of it is com- prised of the funeral oration that (according to Plato) Aspasia wrote and Socrates recited. Read Aspasia's speech. Does it sound convincing? Is it well organized? Based only on this speech, would you say that Aspasia deserved her apparently solid reputation as a philosopher and rhetorician?
e As mentioned above, ancient historians, biographers, and other nonfic- tion authors never cited their sources in formats with which we are famil- iar today: bibliographies, footnotes, quotation marks, parenthetical citations, and the like. And they certainly never asked, formally or other- wise, for permission to use or quote material from another author's books in their own work. Apparently, these authors, and the scholarly commu- nity in general, believed that no one could "own" words, ideas, and infor- mation, and therefore, it would be ludicrous to ask permission of, or to offer payment to, another author for the use of his written material. Things are different these days, where copyright laws and antiplagiarism
? ? ? ? ? ASPASIA AS A MATCHMAKER
Among her many other talents, Aspasia was a noted matchmaker. According to the historian Xenophon (in Memorabilia), Socrates once solicited her thoughts on this topic. She responded by stating that above all, a matchmaker has to be certain that she does not misrepresent the qualities or personalities of the people whom she is trying to match. For if she conveys inaccurate or false information, not only will the poorly matched cou- ple hate each other; they will hate the matchmaker, too, which in turn, obviously would damage the match- maker's reputation.
? ? 162
guidelines have combined to form rigid citation and permission rules to which nonfiction authors must adhere. Which system do you think is superior? Why?
e Plutarch says that Pericles persuaded the Assembly to pass a decree authorizing Athenian military action against the island of Samos (off the western coast of Ionia), because the Samians had disobeyed an Athenian order to end their war against the city of Miletus. (The two of them were fighting over possession of Priene, another city in Ionia. ) Some Athenians believed that Aspasia was responsible for fomenting Athenian involve- ment in this conflict. Why would that suspicion have arisen? Does it make sense?
Further Information
Henry, Madeleine M. Prisoner of History: Aspasia of Miletus and Her Biographical Tradition. Oxford, 1995.
Radice, Betty. Who's Who in the Ancient World (s. v. "Aspasia"). Baltimore, 1973. Websites
Aspasia. http://www. newworldencyclopedia. org/entry/Aspasia
Aspasia biography. http://www. yourdictionary. com/biography/aspasia
Aspasia of Miletus. http://penelope. uchicago. edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/greece/
hetairai/aspasia. html
Bibliography for Document
Bury, The Rev. R. G. (tr. ). Plato: Timaeus; Critias; Cleitophon; Menexenus, Epistles. [LCL. ] London and Cambridge, 1929.
Scott-Kilvert, Ian (tr. ). Plutarch: The Rise and Fall of Athens: Nine Greek Lives. New York, 1960.
Women in Politics? In Ancient Athens?
? ? ? ? ASPASIA AS AN AUTHOR
Aspasia was reputedly the author of not one, but two, funeral orations, including perhaps the most famous such oration of all: the one that Pericles delivered after the first year of fighting in the Peloponnesian War, in which, among other things, he declared that Athens was the "school of Greece. " She receives credit for authoring the second one by no less an authority than Plato, in his dialogue Menexenus. The title character and Socrates are discussing the art of crafting and delivering such a speech: "Menexenus: And do you think that you yourself would be able to make the speech, if required . . . Socrates: That I should be able to make the speech would be nothing [surprising], Menexenus. For she who is my instructor is by no means weak in the art of rhetoric. On the contrary, she has turned out many fine orators, and amongst them one who surpassed all other Greeks, Pericles, the son of Xanthippus. Menexenus: Who is she? But you mean Aspasia, no doubt. Socrates: I do. " [Plato. Menexenus 235 E; 236 A. tr. Bury. ] Socrates goes on to explain that on the previous day, he had heard Aspasia rehearsing a funeral speech that she was preparing. Some of it she had already written; other parts of it she was making up on the spot, and she was doing all of this at the same time she was working on Pericles's funeral oration. Socrates apparently had a copy of the first speech, and Menexenus prevailed upon him to recite it. The rest of the dialogue is taken up with Socrates's presentation of Aspasia's speech.
? ? 163
This page intentionally left blank
32. HOMEGROWN TERRORISM?
INTRODUCTION
First-century BCE Roman politics was as well documented as it was muddled. We have more first-hand literary sources of information about that century than any other in Roman--or Greek--history. It was a time of egomaniacal military and political leaders, whose goals seemed to include domination of the Roman government, and also a time of idealistic individuals determined to stop them. It was a time of shifting political alliances and shifting friendships, changes that seemed to happen weekly . . . or daily . . . or even hourly. The dynamic of the century could be well summarized by one of its most famous events: the assassination of Julius Caesar, in 44 BCE As the circle of almost two dozen conspirators closed around him on the Ides of March, and each one delivered a knife thrust, the mortally wounded Caesar recognized the faces of several men whom he thought were his friends, including Brutus. Young Brutus, his prote? ge? . No wonder Caesar was struck with disbelief--"even you, Brutus? "--at being stabbed in the back, both literally and figuratively, by a friend. Or was he a friend? First century Roman politicians who wanted to survive needed to know who their friends were.
One of the most famous--or infamous--Roman politicians of the time was the dis- appointed office-seeker Lucius Sergius Catilina, better known today as Catiline. Catiline had been a provincial governor (in Africa) in 66, and at the close of his tenure there, he returned to Rome, hoping to run for election to the top office in the Roman government, the consulship. However, irregularities in his African administration pre- cluded his candidacy. He was put on trial for provincial mismanagement, acquitted, and again decided to run for the consulship, this time in 64. He lost. He tried again the next year, and lost again. Now, in effect a three-time loser, Catiline began to search for a more direct, less constitutional, method to gain power: a military coup, which he began organizing toward the end of the year 63. He eventually amassed a large army of followers, over 10,000, and his plot might have worked had not one man gotten in the way, one of the duly elected consuls for 63, the famous orator, lawyer, and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero.
Cicero found out about Catiline's plot, and exposed it in a memorable series of four speeches, delivered near the end of 63. The document consists of the first several paragraphs of his first speech against Catiline, on November 7, 63.
? ? 165
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
? KEEP IN MIND AS YOU READ
1. The Roman Senate was not an elected, legislative body, like the United States Senate, but instead was composed of nonelected statesmen and politicians, drawn from the ranks of former officeholders, who remained senators for life. Its numbers fluctuated, but generally hovered around 300. The Senate's primary role was advi- sory (although its advice was taken seriously, given the composition of its member- ship), but it also exercised some control over financial matters and foreign policy issues. The Senate met when convened by a consul, and Cicero had good reason to call a meeting for November 7: he had been the target of a failed assassination plot engineered by Catiline!
2. Catiline himself had the audacity to attend the November 7 Senate meeting, even though he must have known, or at least suspected, that he was about to be denounced by one of the most eloquent orators of all time. It is uncertain whether Catiline delivered a rebuttal; there is some indication that he made an effort to deny the charges. Or, as some believe, he may have simply walked out of the temple where the meeting took place without attempting to make a reply. It does seem clear, however, that he was shunned by the senators and took a seat by himself during Cicero's speech, well apart from the others.
3. One of the interesting, if unanswerable, questions about Cicero's speech is whether he had a written text of it or simply delivered it extemporaneously. It seems unlikely that he carried a manuscript, or even notes, with him to address the Senate; Roman (and Greek) orators always used elaborate and vigorous arm and hand gestures during their speeches, and it is difficult to envision an orator encumbered by sheets or rolls of paper being able to perform the appropriate gestures. Cicero probably had prepared and rehearsed the speech in advance, rather than making it up as he went along, but he almost certainly did not read it.
4. Like modern attorneys, Cicero bases many of his arguments on legal and historical precedents.
Document: When Cicero Speaks, People
Listen!
In the name of heaven, Catiline, how long do you propose to exploit our patience? Do you really suppose that your lunatic activities are going to escape our retaliation for evermore? Are there to be no limits to this audacious, uncontrollable swaggering? Look at the garrison of our Roman nation which guards the Palatine by night, look at the patrols ranging the city, the whole population gripped by terror, the entire body of loyal citizens massing at one single spot!
Look at this meeting of our Senate behind strongly fortified defenses, see the expressions on the countenances of every one of these men who are here! Have none of these sights made the smallest impact on your heart? You must be well aware that your plot has been detected. Now that every single person in this place knows all about your conspiracy, you cannot fail to realize it is doomed. Do you suppose there is a single individual here who has not got
? ? 166
A group of senators outside the Temple of Jupiter, Roman, fourth century CE. (Louvre, Paris, France/ Alinari/The Bridgeman Art Library)
the very fullest information about what you were doing last night and the night before, where you went, the men you summoned, the plans you concocted?
What a scandalous commentary on our age and its standards! For the senate knows all about these things. The consul sees them being done. And yet this man still lives! Lives? He walks right into the Senate. He joins in our national debates--watches and notes and marks down with his gaze each one of us he plots to assassinate. And we, how brave we are! Just by getting out of the way of his frenzied onslaught, we feel we are doing patriotic duty enough.
But yours was the death which the consul should have ordered long ago. The calamity which you have long been planning for each one of us ought to have rebounded on to yourself alone. The noble Publius Scipio Nasica, who was chief priest but held no admin- istrative office, killed Tiberius Gracchus, although his threat to the national security was only on a limited scale [unlike the much more serious danger posed by
Homegrown Terrorism?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? chief priest: As the title suggests, the pontifex maximus (chief priest) was in charge of official religious func- tions and supervisor of all priests in Rome. Although the responsibilities of the chief priest were mostly reli- gious, there was also a political dimension: the chief priest had to be elected, which necessitated a political campaign--but only once, because he held the position for life.
consul: Remember, there were two con- suls each year. It is not totally clear whether Cicero is referring to him- self here or to the other consul for the year, Gaius Antonius Hybrida. (Interestingly, Hybrida was once thought to have Catilinarian
? ? ? 167
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
Catiline]. Shall we, then, who hold the office of consuls, tolerate Catiline when he is determined to plunge the world into fire and slaughter? Upon precedents that go too far back into antiquity, such as the act of Gaius Servilius Ahala who with his own hand slew Spurius Maelius for plotting a revolution, I shall not dwell, except to say that at former epochs, in this country of ours, brave men did not lack the courage to strike down a dangerous Roman citizen more fiercely even than they struck down the bitterest of foreign foes. Moreover, we have in our hands, Catiline, a decree of the Senate that is specifically aimed against yourself, and a formidable and stern decree it is. From this body, then, the state has no lack of counsel and authority. I tell you frankly, it is we, the consuls, who are not doing our duty. [Tr. Michael Grant. Selected Political Speeches of Cicero. (Against Lucius Sergius Catilina. I. 1-3. ) Penguin Classics, 1969. Page numbers: 76, 77. ]
AFTERMATH
Catiline stormed out of the Senate meeting after the speech and left Rome to join up with his revolutionary army, which was quartered not far away. The next day, November 8, Cicero made a speech to the general population outlining the situation and trying to prevent panic. Meanwhile, the conspirators who remained in Rome after Catiline's abrupt departure on the 7th imprudently divulged their plans to some ambassadors from Gaul (modern France) who hap- pened to be in the city; apparently, the conspirators were hoping that the ambassadors would provide them with additional man- power and supplies. But instead, the Gauls reported the information to Cicero, replete with written documentation. It was precisely the break he needed!
Five of the ringleaders of the conspiracy were apprehended and detained. On December 3, Cicero delivered his third Catilinarian oration, directly to the Roman people, in which he explained the most recent developments in the case against Catiline. Two days later, the Roman Senate debated the issue; during this debate, Cicero brought forth his fourth and final oration against Catiline. The Senate voted for execution, and the sentence was carried out immediately, with Cicero's support and supervision. (Although the Senate's vote did not have the force of law, such was that body's in- fluence in Roman politics that Cicero, and others, would have felt comfortable in interpreting a senatorial decree as tantamount to legal sanction for his actions. )
For the next 20 years of his life, until he was killed in 43, Cicero looked back with pride on his role in suppressing the
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? sympathies, but Cicero gained his support by promising to help him obtain a desirable province to gov- ern after his term as consul had expired. )
the consul should have ordered:
Here, Cicero seems to be referenc- ing himself, not his colleague Hybrida. In October 63, the Senate had passed a resolution con- ferring wide-ranging powers upon the consuls for the protection of the state in an emergency. (This was the senatus consultum ultimum, often abbreviated as S. C. U. , or "final decree of the Senate," some- what similar to martial law in our own times. Such a decree empow- ered the consuls to order execu- tions of individuals deemed to pose a serious danger to the state. )
decree of the Senate: The senatus con- sultum ultimum, mentioned above. the expressions on the countenances: According to Ciceronian commen- tator Albert Harkness, Cicero is here referring to the "looks of sur- prise and indignation with which the senate received Catiline as he
took his seat . . . "
Gaius Servilius Ahala: As he himself
admits, Cicero is reaching far back into Roman history for this prec- edent: 439 BCE. Spurius Maelius was a wealthy plebeian who, at a time of famine and food shortages, was able to devote his own resources to the provision of cheap corn for his starving fellow countrymen. This altruistic action stirred suspicions among the leaders of the Roman government that Spurius was in reality trying to court popular favor, so as to position himself for a run at royal power. Accordingly, the government sent their representative Ahala to deal with Spurius, and deal
? ? ? ? ? 168
Catilinarian conspiracy as the time when he almost single- handedly saved the Roman state. But his political enemies con- demned him for his actions in this case, because he ordered the summary execution of the five men without giving them an opportunity to appeal their death sentences, as required by Roman law.
ASK YOURSELF
1. Why do you suppose Catiline showed up at this meeting of the Roman Senate when he very likely knew that his plot was going to be exposed, and that he himself might be in physical danger?
2. Cicero refers to Publius Scipio Nasica as a vir amplissimus--a very distinguished man. Can we infer from those complimentary words that Cicero approved of Nasica's actions in leading the crowd of senators who struck down Tiberius Gracchus? Would that incident be sound precedent for Cicero to push ahead for the death penalty for the five conspirators?
3. Could Catiline be aptly described as a "home-grown terror- ist"? Why or why not?
TOPICS TO CONSIDER
e Although Catiline's conspiracy certainly posed an imminent threat to the Roman government, and its leading officeholders, especially Cicero, some historians have argued that Cicero's speech against Catiline contains elements of exaggeration. Could you identify any places in the document where Cicero seems to be going a bit overboard in what he says?
e Ciceroargueddozensofcourtcasesandmadedoz- ens of public speeches during his long career as a lawyer and orator. In court, he excelled both as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney, but he was probably more sharp-tongued when on the offen- sive, as he is in the speech against Catiline. Can you find examples in the document where Cicero seems to be sarcastic? Or instances where he engages in personal attacks?
e When the Senate engaged in its momentous December 5 debate on the fate of the five cap- tured conspirators, the first 16 speakers all argued in favor of the death penalty. The 17th speaker, however, suggested that they simply be imprisoned for life, and such was his eloquence that
Homegrown Terrorism?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? he did: he killed him. Spurius's true motives, therefore, are unknown. But Cicero makes it clear what he thought Spurius was up to.
last night and the night before:
Cicero may be referring, in part, to a meeting of the conspirators in which they discussed the details of assassinating him.
Palatine: The Palatine Hill, one of Rome's famous Seven Hills, was home to some of the city's wealthiest residents, who lived in exquisite mansions; our English words "pal- ace" and "palatial" derive from Palatine. The fact that the Palatine had to be patrolled by armed guards indicates the seriousness of the situa- tion caused by Catiline's conspiracy.
Publius Cornelius Scipio: Nasica was one of the consuls in 138 BCE. A short time later, in the turbulent year of 133, when the tribune Tiberius Gracchus had proposed a highly controversial land redistribu- tion measure, Nasica was a leader of the opposition. When Gracchus announced that he would run for reelection to the tribunate--a very nontraditional decision, given that the tribunes were term-limited to one year--Nasica demanded that the consuls take action to stop him. When they refused, Nasica led a band of senators, who were equipped with clubs and heavy sticks, to one of Gracchus's cam- paign rallies, with the apparent intention of taking matters into their own hands. Things quickly turned ugly; violence broke out, and Gracchus was killed. The biog- rapher Plutarch writes that this was the first time in all of Roman his- tory that the blood of citizens was shed in a civil disturbance.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? 169
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
Further Information
the Senate was at least temporarily inclined to go along with that proposal. That speaker's name: Julius Caesar. There has been speculation-- although no solid proof--that Caesar was at least a covert supporter of Catiline. Could this be true? If so, what reasons might Caesar have had for backing someone like Catiline?
e Imagine that you were given the assignment of defending Catiline in court. What arguments on his behalf could you present?
e Investigate the senatus consultum ultimum (S. C. U. ), "the final decree of the Senate. " Under what kinds of circumstances in Roman history had it been invoked prior to the trial of Catiline? What would be the modern equivalent of the S. C. U. ? Are there any similarities between ancient and modern usages of a decree like this?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? scandalous . . . standards: This is the translation given for one of Cicero's most famous utterances: O tempora! O mores! , more suc- cinctly rendered as "Oh, the times! Oh, the morals! "
strongly fortified defenses: This Senate meeting took place in the Temple of Jupiter Stator ("Protector"), which was located on the Palatine Hill, and which was guarded even in normal times. But in this situation, the temple guards were augmented by the patrols that Cicero had previously mentioned.
? ? ? Hutchinson, L. The Conspiracy of Catiline. New York, 1967.
Kaplan, A. Catiline: The Man and His Role in the Roman Revolution. New York, 1968. Odahl, Charles M. Cicero and the Catilinarian Conspiracy. New Haven, CT, 1971. Scullard, H. H. From the Gracchi to Nero: A History of Rome from 133 B. C. to A. D. 68.
London, 1959.
? ? ? ? THE ULTIMATE ANCIENT AUTHORITY ON CATILINE'S CONSPIRACY
Gaius Sallustius Crispus (86-34 BCE), commonly known today as Sallust, wrote a detailed historical account of the Catilinarian conspiracy. The treatise, which survives intact, contains 61 sections and covers all the important events: a description of Catiline's character; his plot and all its ramifications; the arrest of the five ringleaders; the debate over their punishment; their execution; the activities of Catiline's revolutionary army and its defeat; and the death of Catiline.
In addition to his writing career, Sallust was also a politician, orator, and lawyer. Interestingly, he was once matched up against Cicero, in a court case (52 BCE) involving Titus Annius Milo, on trial for murdering a politi- cal opponent; Cicero was the defense lawyer, Sallust assisted in the prosecution. The story goes that Sallust had a personal motive for joining in with the prosecution: some time before, he had been discovered in flagrante with Milo's wife, whereupon Milo publicly horse-whipped him for his adulterous behavior and, in addition, laid a heavy fine upon him.
As for the outcome of Milo's court case . . . the situation was so politically charged--the courtroom was surrounded with heavily armed guards--that Cicero never actually delivered any speeches in defense of his client, although the transcript still survives of the speech he would have made. Milo fled to Massilia (modern Marseilles in southern France) and enjoyed a brief "retirement" from the hurly-burly of Roman politics, until once again reprising his involvement, and ultimately being executed (48 BCE) for fomenting violence.
? ? 170
Websites
Catiline Biography. http://www. bookrags. com/biography/catiline
Catiline Conspiracy. http://www. unrv. com/roman-republic/catiline-conspiracy. php
Bibliography for Document
Artwork: The cover of this book displays a very famous painting that depicts Cicero excori- ating Catiline before the Roman Senate. Catiline sits off to one side, alone, depressed, and sulking. The painting is entitled Cicero Denounces Catiline, by Cesare Maccari (1840-1919), who created it in 1888.
Grant, Michael (tr. ). Selected Political Speeches of Cicero. New York, 1969.
Homegrown Terrorism?
171
This page intentionally left blank
33. THE WOMEN OF ROME REFUSE TO BACK DOWN
INTRODUCTION
Roman women were probably as politically disadvantaged as Greek women: they could not vote; they could not hold public office; they could not attend and participate in the gather- ings of the legislative bodies. And they usually could not take collective action to show their support for or displeasure with legal or political issues . . . usually.
But in 195 BCE, a striking exception occurred to the stay-at-home status to which most Roman women were restricted most of the time. In that year, a political debate was occur- ring about the possibility of repealing the Oppian Law of 215 BCE. This law, which was passed just after the disastrous Battle of Cannae (216) in the Second Punic War, placed severe restrictions on women's finery; specifically, it mandated that: (1) no woman could own more than a half ounce of gold; (2) no woman could wear multicolored clothing, espe- cially that which was trimmed with purple; (3) no woman could ride in horse-drawn car- riages, except during religious processions. The rationale for the passage of this law in 215 was probably that since Rome was in the midst of a desperate war against their bitter rival the city-state of Carthage, luxury goods had to be regulated, and perhaps even contributed to help fund the war effort. But by 195, the war was over, and so there was a concomitant longing for repeal of some of the restrictive wartime measures that had been enacted, includ- ing the Oppian Law. Accordingly, two tribunes, Marcus Fundanius and Lucius Valerius, proposed removing the law from the books. But two other tribunes, Marcus Junius Brutus and Publius Junius Brutus, threatened to veto the repeal effort, and that is when the sparks began to fly!
Our source for this chapter's fourth document, the historian Titus Livius (better known today as "Livy"), reports that when news of the veto threat spread, crowds of people flocked to the streets, both supporters and opponents of the repeal, to raucously make known their views. A large portion of the assemblage--astonishingly--was comprised of women! Angry, aggressive women. Livy says that they streamed out of their houses, even when for- bidden by their husbands to do so, and blocked the streets. They accosted the men who opposed repeal, bitterly complaining that since better times had returned with the end of the war, the need for sumptuary laws had vanished. Day after day, the street demonstrations continued, and even grew larger and more vocal as women from the countryside and nearby towns joined in. Their boldness increased commensurately; they took their arguments
? ? 173
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
directly to the leading officeholders of the government. The stage was set for a major public debate, filled with emotion and rancor.
KEEP IN MIND AS YOU READ
1. The Oppian Law was named for the politician who proposed it in 215, the tribune Gaius Oppius.
2. Although the crowds in the streets were both large and noisy (if Livy is to be believed), the formal debate about the fate of the Oppian Law involved only Marcus Porcius Cato (anti-repeal), Lucius Valerius (pro-repeal), and short, unre- corded speeches by the two tribunes who had threatened to veto the repeal.
3. Cato, the chief proponent and spokesman for the Oppian Law, was a formidable force in Roman politics for most of his adult life (he lived into his eighties). To openly oppose him on any issue would require a powerful mixture of fortitude, assertiveness, oratorical skill, and intelligence, and so it must have been a daunting task for someone like a mere tribune to take him on in a public debate. But Lucius Valerius seemed to be up to the task.
Document: Women in Roman Politics
Amid the anxieties of [a recently-ended great war], an incident occurred, trivial to relate, but which, by reason of the passions it aroused, developed into a violent con- tention. Marcus Fundanius and Lucius Valerius, trib- unes of the people, proposed to the [legislative] assembly the abrogation of the Oppian Law . .
