Commentaries on Cicero: Atticus 3.10.2 and Cornelius Nepos 8.3

7993843











Dr. Mary Beagon

COMMENTARIES Cicero, Att. 3.10.2 e) This is an extract from a letter written from Cicero to Atticus on 17th June 59BC, which expresses Cicero’s distress towards his exile from Rome (by virtue of Publics Clodius Pulcher’s Leges Clodiae), thus his loss of dignitas which, as “a man from Arpinum” (Atticus 1.16.10, Cicero quotes Clodius in the Senate); he has struggled to attain. The ‘Ist Triumvirate’ (a political alliance between Pompey, Caesar and Crassus)were no longer a united front, but all were pleased to see Cicero exiled from Rome due to his repeated attacks upon them. Cicero went to Macedonia and then to Dyrrhachum on the Adriatic Coast. Att. 3.10 is written from Thessalonica in Macedonia. Amicitia (friendship) is a central theme that connects all the letters, especially those to Atticus. Cicero cemented familial ties with Atticus by arranging the marriage of his brother, Quintus Cicero, to Atticus’ sister Pompona (Nepos Life of Atticus 5.3). The orchestration of this marriage may have been utilitarian and expedient on Cicero’s part, but the initial friendship of Atticus and Cicero was genuine thus their friendship remains ideal. Cicero dedicated three philosophical works to Atticus: ‘Cato, De Senectute’, ‘De Gloria’ and most importantly for this passage, ‘De Amicitia’. Cicero’s reminds Atticus of their bond of amicitia, which appears to be a political, cultural and personal friendship “as you so often and so energetically do…whether there is any misfortune too great to have its place in this disaster of mine.” Cicero poses this rhetorical question to Atticus to evoke pathos and sympathy for his situation. Showing sympathy and affection to a friend is part of Laelius’ definition of amicitia in Cicero’s Laelius de Amicitia (48).

WORD COUNT: 2123

!1

7993843











Dr. Mary Beagon

Cicero states the loss of his younger “brother” who was also a politician. Quintus wore black when Cicero was exiled, like Metellus Celer did when he felt a threat towards the political position of Nepos (Fam 5.1, 62BC). I argue that Cicero is grateful for his friendship with Atticus “for friendship itself is greater than family connections,” (De Amicitia, 18) although Cicero placing Quintus above Atticus in Att.1.17.5 disputes this. Atticus has nothing to gain from Cicero (in exile) yet supports him out of goodwill, a rarity in Roman politics. Friction between Cicero and Clodius shows how personal enmity takes its form in the public politics of Rome. The “disaster of mine” refers to Cicero’s exile due to Clodius’ Leges Clodiae - Clodian Laws. Specifically the third law of the aforesaid —‘Lex Clodia de Censoribus’— which dictated punishment for those who had executed Roman citizens without trial. This law was clearly set up to target Cicero, resulting in his exile for the execution of those involved in the Second Catilinarian Conspiracy of 63BC. Cicero had previously tried to build up a utilitarian, pragmatic friendship with Appius Claudius (Clodius’ brother) because of his connections; using the pretext that they are intellectually and religiously tied (members of the same College). Cicero attempted to appeal to Appius by reminding him that public maintenance of friendship is part of a wider network of amicitia which brings more responsibility. A breach of fides (trust) looks bad (Fam. 3.10.7-9). This example of a utilitarian friendship was of course strained by Cicero’s tempestuous relationship with Clodius and Appius Claudius’ governorship of Cilicia. When exposing Catiline in the Temple of Jupiter Stator, Cicero found it difficult to convince the Senate because he was a novus homo. He lacked auctoritas as consul, later gaining it as an elder statesman. As a novus homo, he felt he worked harder than the ‘piscinarii’ (“fishfanciers” who Cicero believed to be jealous of him) to attain political office, the loss of his dignitas would have been a catastrophic blow. He felt that he had lost “rank, fame, children, fortune, brother” all of which gave a Roman man his dignitas. “In politics a man’s dignitas was

WORD COUNT: 2123

!2

7993843











Dr. Mary Beagon

his good name - that ‘bona aestimatio’ on which Gaius Gracchus laid such stress. It was his reputation and standing..” (J. P. V. D. Balsdon (1960) “Auctoritas, Dignitas, Otium” p.45). Cicero is writing to Atticus, who is described by Nepos as ‘perpetuo a majoribus acceptum equestrem obtuinuit dignitatem’. Fergus Millar highlights how it is “striking that dignities can be used of a personal status not associated with any public office, or still less with any positive achievement.” (Millar (1988) page 41. ‘Cornelius Nepos, ‘Atticus’ and the Roman Revolution.’) Cicero’s fortuna had undergone reversal, which also affected his monetary fortune i.e. his house on the Palatine Hill upon which Clodius built a religious site. Cicero borrowed money from the nephew of Sulla to buy this house and subsequently defended him in court. This palatial house was metres from the Forum, henceforth a metonym for the Roman aristocracy. In addition to the glamour, Cicero probably felt some importance in the etiological myth of Romulus and Remus on the Palatine Hill. This gave his real estate unique status as built upon the original land of Rome, consequently making its destruction all the more poignant. The loss of his “children” reminds us of the letter from Servius Sulpicius Rufus to Cicero (Fam 4.5, 45BC) in which the former sympathises and offers Cicero advice following the death of his daughter Tullia. Servius Sulpicius displays favourable amicitia by offering pragmatic advice. He puts Tullia’s death in a small perspective compared to the death of the Roman Republic, by describing a panoramic view of crushed cities (Aegina destroyed by pirates in the third century, Megara sacked by Calenus after the Battle of Phrasally and Piraeus burnt down by Sulla). Sulpicius reminds Cicero of his pietas to Rome and empathises by putting himself in Cicero’s position. He goes as far as imitating techniques used by Cicero in ‘Pro Milone’ to comfort him. Sulpicius’ advice somewhat reflects the Stoic, very much Roman, philosophy of endurance.

WORD COUNT: 2123

!3

7993843











Dr. Mary Beagon

Cicero’s language and tone indicate his emotional state: “Has any man ever fallen from so fine a position, with so good a cause, so strong in resources of talent…the support of all honest men?” His repetition of ‘so’ at the beginning of the three clauses is anaphoric, and reflects the Biblical anaphora which is used for tragic emphasis. We hear ‘Cicero the orator’s’ apostrophe in this letter as if he is dictating it as a speech to Tiro, his secretary. His language of lament in the given extract implies that he is upset that he has been punished for actions he wished to be lauded and remembered for (cf. In Catilinam IV. 21: “There will certainly be some place for my fame amid the praise of these men…” and cf. Fam. 5.12 from 12 April 55 Cicero to the historian L. Lucceius: “my name should gain lustre and celebrity through your work…immortality hurries me on…” Cicero pleads for Lucceius to write of his glory. Cicero was most noted for wearing “the gown of peace” [letter from M. Cato to Cicero, April 50] at home in Rome).

WORD COUNT: 2123

!4

7993843











Dr. Mary Beagon

Bibliography Cornelius Nepos ‘Life of Atticus’ De Amicitia De Re Publica Fam. In Cat. Letters to Atticus Plutarch ‘Life of Cicero’

Allen, W. (1944). ‘Cicero’s house and Libertas’, TAPA 75: pp. 1-9. Balsdon, J. P. V. D. (1960). ‘Auctoritas, Dignitas, Otium’, CQ 10: pp. 43-51 Epstein, D. (1987). ‘Personal Enmity in Roman Politics’, CQ: pp. 218-43. Horsfall, N. (1989). ‘Cornelius Nepos: a selection, including the lives of Cato and Atticus’. Volume 42, Issue 2. Oxford Press. Classical Review (CR). Moles, J. L. (1988/2007). ‘Plutarch, The Life of Cicero’. Millar, F. (1988). ‘Cornelius Nepos, Atticus and the Roman Revolution.’ Cambridge University Press, Classical Association. Vol. xxxv. No.1. CQ: pp. 40-55. Rawson, E. (1994). ’Cicero: a Portrait’, ch. 7. Bristol Classical Paperbacks. Seager, R. (1965). ‘Clodius, Pompeius and the Exile of Cicero’, Latonus 64: pp. 519-31.

WORD COUNT: 2123

!5

7993843











Dr. Mary Beagon

COMMENTARIES Cornelius Nepos, Life of Atticus, 8.3-4 This extract is from Cornelius Nepos’ biography of Atticus. It describes the events after the Ides of March. Despite Plutarch’s claims that popular opinion was against the killers of Caesar (12.4), “Some people” were in support of Brutus and Cassius. Cicero was glad for Caesar’s death and advised the killers to leave: “‘Twas a fine deed, but only half done!” (14.12, Apr. 44, Cicero to Atticus—which expresses his animosity towards Antony). The “private fund” would have enabled Brutus and Cassius to employ an army for the forthcoming Battle of Philippi (42 BC). Atticus was one of the “leading men” of the equestrian order because of his inherited wealth from his father (two million sesterces, Nepos 14.2) and uncle Caecilius (ten million sesterces, Nepos 5.1). On orders of Brutus, Atticus was approached by Gaius Flavius Hemicillus to contribute to the fund. Gaius Flavius, of the plebeian gens Flavia, was a banker who gave his service as Praefectus Fabrum at the Battle of Philippi. Brutus needed Flavius as he had acquired 3 legions (200 cavalrymen) who were previously the soldiers of Vatinius. Flavius was a familiaris of Brutus and Atticus. Atticus essentially vetoed this scheme to maintain his neutrality between the Caesarians (Antony, Octavian and Lepidus) and “Caesar’s assassins”. Regardless of the friendship between Marcus Brutus and Atticus, whom he kept as a “daily companion” (Nepos 8.2). Atticus preferred to be inactive in politics and had chosen the mode of life known as (honestum) otium (leisure). A life in which one pursues literary and cultural activity, rather than a life of political honours and honorum studium. This is not to say Atticus wasn’t interested in the

WORD COUNT: 2123

!6

7993843











Dr. Mary Beagon

politics at Rome, Kathryn Welch calls him the ‘financier’ who has a financial empire to increase and protect in a dangerous and uncertain political world (cf. Welch (1996)). In Letter to Atticus 1.17.5, Cicero states he saw no difference in him and Atticus as people (reflects idea in De Amicitia of a friend being a mirror of oneself) apart from the fact that “ambition has led me to seek political advancement…another resolution led you to seek an honourable independence.” It is viable that Atticus didn’t want a political career because of the violence during the civil war in the 80s and the death of his friend P. Sulpicius Rufus (Welch (1996) p.451-2). Atticus opted for the life of otium, as the same letter recalls he didn’t use resources and take opportunities which were presented to him in politics. “He was referring to lucrative negotia both in Rome and in the provinces” (J. D. H’Arms (1981) p.60). An example of this is letter to Atticus 1.16.14 (and Nepos 6.4) in which Atticus declines an invitation to go to Asia with Quintus Cicero. Fergus Millar thinks this was a wise decision as governors in provinces were known for their exploitation and criminal activity (e.g. Appius Claudius and Verres) henceforth, Atticus avoided “suspicions of crimina” (Millar (1988) p.44). Cicero expresses that Atticus’ friendships have a higher motive than utilitarian purpose, as he never attempted to profit by the offices Cicero had held (Att. 1.17.5). This can be disputed as Atticus asked Cicero for aid in the ‘siege of Sicyone’, a province wherein Atticus was owed debt which was not covered by legislation (cf. Welch (1996)). Shackleton Bailey states Atticus preferred friendships with the aristocratic optimates. Atticus sided with the optimates Lucullus, Ahenobarbarus, Cato and others who were opposed to Pompey. Due to this absence of neutrality, Welch deciphers that Cicero blames him for his exile in letter to Quintus from 48. Pompey wanted land for his veterans and debt relief. Atticus not only owned land of his own but was also owed debt, furthermore he represented the funds of some of Pompey’s enemies. He remained diplomatic with Pompey because of Pompey’s power. But his allegiance with the optimates was a form of betrayal according to

WORD COUNT: 2123

!7

7993843











Dr. Mary Beagon

Cicero (Welch (1996)). As we see from the letter of 43: Ad. M. Brut. XIV (1.6), the system of Amicitia sometimes crosses over with the system of patronage i.e. looking after a friend of a friend, Atticus’ own interests were put before the safety of Cicero thus with the loss of his neutrality came the loss of amicitia. Nepos 7.3 recites an event after the Battle of Pharsalus. When Atticus, Pomponia (Atticus’ sister), Quintus Cicero and Quintus Junior were all pardoned for money collection by Julius Caesar albeit being in Pompey’s camp. This shows not only the influence of Atticus as “the political operator who worked outside the Senate to advise and influence those inside it.” (Welch (1996) p.451). This description parallels Atticus to Fulvia, though she held influence on those inside the Senate through her powerful marriages (Clods, Curio and Antony). Nepos 7.3 gives us an insight into the contrasting attitudes of Caesar and Pompey. Caesar was openly supportive of people who wanted to stay away from politics. He sees a neutral stance better than an opposing one, thus Atticus was playing the smart game by being part of the optimate partes but not engaging in civil strife (cf. Nepos 6.1). Fergus Millar reminds us that Atticus even rejected Sulla when he requested Atticus to accompany him on the invasion of Italy (p.43 of ‘Cornelius Nepos, ‘Atticus’ and the Roman Revolution). Atticus escaping “new dangers” by his wise stance of neutrality can be compared to the comical survival of client-king Deiotarus by the virtue of swaying his support for and against the rulers of Rome (first Caesar then the First Triumvirate). Atticus’ skills of friendship were most useful when he financially aided Fulvia during the campaign of Mutina (43BC). When the second Triumvirate came into being and proscriptions were made, Antony saved Atticus for his officium (Millar (1988) p.45). Atticus’ support of people in dangerous and vulnerable position who later came to power, in this instance, saved his life. J. H. D’Arms refers to Cicero’s “De Officiis” to make the point that Cicero had Atticus in mind when talking of men who “concentrated exclusively on the managing of their own

WORD COUNT: 2123

!8

7993843











Dr. Mary Beagon

financial interests within the category of men who lived a vita otiosa” (J. D’Arms (1981) p.61). Nepos highlights hat he is very generous with his money too—he even offers Cicero money as a motive to stop him committing suicide in 58 (250,000 HS). Welch states that during his time in Athens, Atticus was in a position where he could “guarantee loans for the unfortunately placed Athenians.” (Welch (1996) p.453). His wealth made him important to the likes of Sulla, Cicero, Hortentius and others. The neutrality of Atticus is put in a social context when he plays the archetypal “middle man” between Cicero and Hortentius (Welch). He was close to both and managed each of their money, moreover he tried his best to keep the two diplomatically allied. Fergus Millar states that “in the 80s, when the state was divided between the Sullen and the Cinnani, he saw no chance of living pro dignitate, for fear of offending one or other party - so he withdrew to Athens and took no part (2.1-2).” (Millar (1988) p.42). Though Atticus is noted for his lack of action in politics, his dignitas had been inherited from his family’s old name. Atticus does allow the assassins to make use of his “resources” and estate. Millar criticises Nepos as he praises Atticus’ “private officia” when the outcome of the inaction of Atticus resulted in Brutus and Cassius as the last “to fight in the name of libertas.” (Millar (1988) p.44). Despite his power which stopped the private fund and his refusal to contribute to it, Nepos states that Atticus gave Brutus 100,000 sesterces on leaving Italy, and ordered an extra 300,000 sesterces to be sent to him in absentia when he was away. A combined total of 400,000 Hs, the prerequisite asset value to become a Roman Knight. This suggests Atticus felt some allegiance to Brutus, probably as a friend rather than a political ally. This height of his monetary power allowed Atticus to be politically inactive but still influential.

WORD COUNT: 2123

!9

7993843











Dr. Mary Beagon

Bibliography Aristotle ‘Philia’ Cornelius Nepos ‘Life of Atticus’ De Amicitia Fam. In Cat. Plutarch ‘Life of Cicero’

Andreau, J. (1999). ’Banking and Business in the roman World’. Cambridge University Press. Balsdon, J. P. V. D. (1960). ‘Auctoritas, Dignitas, Otium’, CQ 10: pp. 43-51 D. R. Shackleton Bailey, ‘Letters to Atticus’ vol. i,3ff. Gelzer, M. (1975) ‘The Roman Nobility’ (Oxford), 101-110 Millar, F. (1988). ‘Cornelius Nepos, Atticus and the Roman Revolution.’ Cambridge University Press, Classical Association. Vol. xxxv. No.1. CQ: pp. 40-55. P, Brunt. (1965) ‘Amicitia in the Late Roman Republic’, PCPS 11, 1ff.

WORD COUNT: 2123

!10