electoral corruption.
The senate’s action in revoking the consulships and appointing in their place the two senators (and fellow-candidates) who had been their accusers was to provoke a storm which shook the fabric of Rome, rotten though that was. But before detailing this old scandal, in which Caesar very probably played a part, it is worth noticing another act of his during his year of office. This was to put on a special series of gladiatorial games, entirely at his own expense and unconnected with the normal city festivals, to commemorate the death of his father twenty years before. The significance of this was obvious enough—the celebration of the Julian clan—and, rather than immortalizing the memory of a man who had lived a comparatively undistinguished life, to call the public’s attention to the munificence and glory of his son. Being responsible for the public places as aedile, Caesar also had the statues and memorials of Marius, which had been banished from the Forum and streets during Sulla’s dictatorship, cleaned and gilded and restored to their former places. The people, for whom Marius, the man of common stock, had ever remained a hero, were delighted and showed their approval, but the Optimates very naturally took exception to this celebration of the man they regarded as the enemy of the conservative tradition. Catulus, the leader of the Optimates in the senate, and one of the most distinguished Romans of the time, made a speech against Caesar, ending with the ominous and perspicacious words: “Caesar is no longer trying to undermine the republic, he is now using battering-rams.”
There remains some doubt about Caesar’s part in the other major event of that stormy year: the conspiracy to assassinate the two consuls, Cotta and Torquatus, who had been elected in place of the two favored by Crassus. At the same time as this proposed double murder, a revolt was supposed to take place among the cities north of the Po (where Caesar had already shown himself active) and, during the confusion following the death of the consuls, Crassus, it was said, was to seize the dictatorship with Caesar as his Master of the Horse (Second-in-Command of the Army). Suetonius, who reports this affair giving his earlier authorities, is the only source we have, but he is somewhat suspect all the same since Cicero, who disliked intensely what Caesar stood for, makes no mention of his having had any connection with this abortive plot although he does mention the projected role of Crassus. Since Caesar was now so intimate a friend and adviser to the millionaire it seems likely that he was aware of the plot and may even, as Suetonius suggests, have been intended to play a major role in it. Nevertheless, the verdict must be “Not Proven.”
In Egypt Ptolemy Auletes, the Fluteplayer, and father of the Cleopatra who was to play so large a part on the Roman scene in the years to come, having murdered his predecessor, had just been driven from the throne by his subjects in Alexandria. The burning question was—had the murdered king already bequeathed Egypt to the Roman State? If so, then a Governor-General with special powers should be appointed to look into the affairs of Egypt and take over the administration of the kingdom. This was the role for which Caesar, with the help of Crassus, had cast himself. Egypt, that prosperous and powerful linchpin of the Mediterranean, would give the two men a great power base to counterbalance the one that Pompey was establishing for himself in Asia. Crassus probably felt that Caesar would be happy to act as a lieutenant in such an office, but Caesar was undoubtedly looking beyond the ambitions of his “master.” It is not surprising that the conservative senators, who had been closely watching the activities of the two men, were determined to block any such move—even at the cost of not acquiring such an important territory for Rome. The man who effectively destroyed the arguments of the
The senate’s action in revoking the consulships and appointing in their place the two senators (and fellow-candidates) who had been their accusers was to provoke a storm which shook the fabric of Rome, rotten though that was. But before detailing this old scandal, in which Caesar very probably played a part, it is worth noticing another act of his during his year of office. This was to put on a special series of gladiatorial games, entirely at his own expense and unconnected with the normal city festivals, to commemorate the death of his father twenty years before. The significance of this was obvious enough—the celebration of the Julian clan—and, rather than immortalizing the memory of a man who had lived a comparatively undistinguished life, to call the public’s attention to the munificence and glory of his son. Being responsible for the public places as aedile, Caesar also had the statues and memorials of Marius, which had been banished from the Forum and streets during Sulla’s dictatorship, cleaned and gilded and restored to their former places. The people, for whom Marius, the man of common stock, had ever remained a hero, were delighted and showed their approval, but the Optimates very naturally took exception to this celebration of the man they regarded as the enemy of the conservative tradition. Catulus, the leader of the Optimates in the senate, and one of the most distinguished Romans of the time, made a speech against Caesar, ending with the ominous and perspicacious words: “Caesar is no longer trying to undermine the republic, he is now using battering-rams.”
There remains some doubt about Caesar’s part in the other major event of that stormy year: the conspiracy to assassinate the two consuls, Cotta and Torquatus, who had been elected in place of the two favored by Crassus. At the same time as this proposed double murder, a revolt was supposed to take place among the cities north of the Po (where Caesar had already shown himself active) and, during the confusion following the death of the consuls, Crassus, it was said, was to seize the dictatorship with Caesar as his Master of the Horse (Second-in-Command of the Army). Suetonius, who reports this affair giving his earlier authorities, is the only source we have, but he is somewhat suspect all the same since Cicero, who disliked intensely what Caesar stood for, makes no mention of his having had any connection with this abortive plot although he does mention the projected role of Crassus. Since Caesar was now so intimate a friend and adviser to the millionaire it seems likely that he was aware of the plot and may even, as Suetonius suggests, have been intended to play a major role in it. Nevertheless, the verdict must be “Not Proven.”
In Egypt Ptolemy Auletes, the Fluteplayer, and father of the Cleopatra who was to play so large a part on the Roman scene in the years to come, having murdered his predecessor, had just been driven from the throne by his subjects in Alexandria. The burning question was—had the murdered king already bequeathed Egypt to the Roman State? If so, then a Governor-General with special powers should be appointed to look into the affairs of Egypt and take over the administration of the kingdom. This was the role for which Caesar, with the help of Crassus, had cast himself. Egypt, that prosperous and powerful linchpin of the Mediterranean, would give the two men a great power base to counterbalance the one that Pompey was establishing for himself in Asia. Crassus probably felt that Caesar would be happy to act as a lieutenant in such an office, but Caesar was undoubtedly looking beyond the ambitions of his “master.” It is not surprising that the conservative senators, who had been closely watching the activities of the two men, were determined to block any such move—even at the cost of not acquiring such an important territory for Rome. The man who effectively destroyed the arguments of the
Similar Books
