Chapter XXX (3)
It was high time for Cæsar to provide himself with an agent in Rome. The month of March was near at hand, when the long-awaited discussion of his provinces would come up in the senate. His political future, and his rights as a citizen, depended upon his success in blocking the efforts of the senate to take his provinces from him before the end of the year, when he could step from the proconsulship to the consulship. An interval of even a month in private life between the two offices would be all that his enemies would need for bringing political charges against him that would effect his ruin. His displacement before the end of the year must be prevented, therefore, at all hazards. To this task Curio addressed himself, and with surpassing adroitness. He did not come out at once as Cæsar's champion. His function was to hold the scales true between Cæsar and Pompey, to protect the Commonwealth against the overweening ambition and threatening policy of both men. He supported the proposal that Cæsar should be called upon to surrender his army, but coupled with it the demand that Pompey also should be required to give up his troops and his proconsulship. The fairness of his plan appealed to the masses, who would not tolerate a favor to Pompey at Cæsar's expense. It won over even a majority of the senate. The cleverness of his policy was clearly shown at a critical meeting of the senate in December of the year 50 B.C. Appian tells us the story:[136] "In the senate the opinion of each member was asked, and Claudius craftily divided the question and took the votes separately, thus: 'Shall Pompey be deprived of his command?' The majority voted against the latter proposition, and it was decreed that successors to Cæsar should be sent. Then Curio put the question whether both should lay down their commands, and twenty-two voted in the negative, while three hundred and seventy went back to the opinion of Curio in order to avoid civil discord. Then Claudius dismissed the senate, exclaiming: 'Enjoy your victory and have Cæsar for a master!'" The senate's action was vetoed, and therefore had no legal value, but it put Cæsar and Curio in the right and Pompey' s partisans in the wrong.
As a part of his policy of defending Cæsar by calling attention to the exceptional position and the extra-constitutional course of Pompey, Curio offset the Conservative attacks on Cæsar by public speeches fiercely arraigning Pompey for what he had done during his consulship, five years before. When we recall Curio's biting wit and sarcasm, and the unpopularity of Pompey's high-handed methods of that year, we shall appreciate the effectiveness of this flank attack.
Another weapon which he used freely was his unlimited right of veto as tribune. As early as April Cælius appreciated how successful these tactics would be, and he saw the dilemma in which they would put the Conservatives, for he writes to Cicero: "This is what I have to tell you: if they put pressure at every point on Curio, Cæsar will defend his right to exercise the veto; if, as seems likely, they shrink [from overruling him], Cæsar will stay [in his province] as long as he likes." The veto power was the weapon which he used against the senate at the meeting of that body on the first of December, to which reference has already been made. The elections in July had gone against Cæsar. Two Conservatives had been returned as consuls. In the autumn the senate had found legal means of depriving Cæsar of two of his legions. Talk of a compromise was dying down. Pompey, who had been desperately ill in the spring, had regained his strength. He had been exasperated by the savage attacks of Curio. Sensational stories of the movements of Cæsar's troops in the North were whispered in the forum, and increased the tension. In the autumn, for instance, Cæsar had occasion to pay a visit to the towns in northern Italy to thank them for their support of Mark Antony, his candidate for the tribunate, and the wild rumor flew to Rome that he had advanced four legions to Placentia,[137] that his march on the city had begun, and tumult and confusion followed. It was in these circumstances that the consul Marcellus moved in the senate that successors be sent to take over Cæsar's provinces, but the motion was blocked by the veto of Curio, whereupon the consul cried out: "If I am prevented by the vote of the senate from taking steps for the public safety, I will take such steps on my own responsibility as consul." After saying this he darted out of the senate and proceeded to the suburbs with his colleague, where he presented a sword to Pompey, and said: "My colleague and I command you to march against Cæsar in behalf of your country, and we give you for this purpose the army now at Capua, or in any other part of Italy, and whatever additional forces you choose to levy."[138] Curio had accomplished his purpose. He had shown that Pompey as well as Cæsar was a menace to the state; he had prevented Cæsar's recall; he had shown Antony, who was to succeed him in the tribunate, how to exasperate the senate into using coercive measures against his sacrosanct person as tribune and thus justify Cæsar's course in the war, and he had goaded the Conservatives into taking the first overt step in the war by commissioning Pompey to begin a campaign against Cæsar without any authorization from the senate or the people.
The news of the unconstitutional step taken by Marcellus and Pompey reached Rome December 19 or 20. Curio's work as tribune was done, and on the twenty-first of the month he set out for the North to join his leader. The senate would be called together by the new consuls on January 1, and since, before the reform in the calendar, December had only twenty-nine days, there were left only eight days for Curio to reach Cæsar's head-quarters, lay the situation before him, and return to the city with his reply. Ravenna, where Cæsar had his head-quarters, was two hundred and forty miles from Rome. He covered the distance, apparently, in three days, spent perhaps two days with Cæsar, and was back in Rome again for the meeting of the senate on the morning of January 1. Consequently, he travelled at the rate of seventy-five or eighty miles a day, twice the rate of the ordinary Roman courier.
We cannot regret too keenly the fact that we have no account of Curio's meeting with Cæsar, and his recital to Cæsar of the course of events in Rome. In drawing up the document which was prepared at this conference, Cæsar must have been largely influenced by the intimate knowledge which Curio had of conditions in the capital, and of the temper of the senate. It was an ultimatum, and, when Curio presented it to the senate, that body accepted the challenge, and called upon Cæsar to lay down his command on a specified date or be declared a public enemy. Cæsar replied by crossing the border of his province and occupying one town after another in northern Italy in rapid succession. All this had been agreed upon in the meeting between Curio and Cæsar, and Velleius Paterculus[139] is probably right in putting the responsibility for the war largely on the shoulders of Curio, who, as he says, brought to naught the fair terms of peace which Cæsar was ready to propose and Pompey to accept. The whole situation points to the conclusion that Cæsar did not desire war, and was not prepared for it. Had he anticipated its immediate outbreak, he would scarcely have let it arise when he had only one legion with him on the border, while his other ten legions were a long distance away.
From the outset Curio took an active part in the war which he had done so much to bring about, and it was an appropriate thing that the closing events in his life should have been recorded for us by his great patron, Cæsar, in his narrative of the Civil War. On the 18th or 19th of January, within ten days of the crossing of the Rubicon, we hear of his being sent with a body of troops to occupy Iguvium,[140] and a month later he is in charge of one of the investing camps before the stronghold of Corfinium.[141] With the fall of Corfinium, on the 21st of February, Cæsar's rapid march southward began, which swept the Pompeians out of Italy within a month and gave Cæsar complete control of the peninsula. In that brilliant campaign Curio undoubtedly took an active part, for at the close of it Cæsar gave him an independent commission for the occupation of Sicily and northern Africa. No more important command could have been given him, for Sicily and Africa were the granaries of Rome, and if the Pompeians continued to hold them, the Cæsarians in Italy might be starved into submission. To this ill-fated campaign Cæsar devotes the latter half of the second book of his Civil War. In the beginning of his account of it he remarks: "Showing at the outset a total contempt for the military strength of his opponent, Publius Attius Varus, Curio crossed over from Sicily, accompanied by only two of the four legions originally given him by Cæsar, and by only five hundred cavalry."[142] The estimate which Cælius had made of him was true, after all, at least in military affairs. He was bold and impetuous, and lacked a settled policy. Where daring and rapidity of movement could accomplish his purpose, he succeeded, but he lacked patience in finding out the size and disposition of the enemy's forces and calmness of judgment in comparing his own strength with that of his foe. It was this weakness in his character as a military leader which led him to join battle with Varus and Juba's lieutenant, Saburra, without learning beforehand, as he might have done, that Juba, with a large army, was encamped not six miles in the rear of Saburra. Curio's men were surrounded by the enemy and cut down as they stood. His staff begged him to seek safety in flight, but, as Cæsar writes,[143] "He answered without hesitation that, having lost the army which Cæsar had entrusted to his charge, he would never return to look him in the face, and with that answer he died fighting."
Three years later the fortunes of war brought Cæsar to northern Africa, and he traversed a part of the region where Curio's luckless campaign had been carried on. With the stern eye of the trained soldier, he marked the fatal blunders which Curio had made, but he recalled also the charm of his personal qualities, and the defeat before Utica was forgotten in his remembrance of the great victory which Curio had won for him, single-handed, in Rome. Even Lucan, a partisan of the senate which Curio had flouted, cannot withhold his admiration for Curio's brilliant career, and his pity for Curio's tragic end. As he stands in imagination before the fallen Roman leader, he exclaims:[144] "Happy wouldst thou be, O Rome, and destined to bless thy people, had it pleased the gods above to guard thy liberty as it pleased them to avenge its loss. Lo! the noble body of Curio, covered by no tomb, feeds the birds of Libya. But to thee, since it profiteth not to pass in silence those deeds of thine which their own glory defends forever 'gainst the decay of time, such tribute now we pay, O youth, as thy life has well deserved. No other citizen of such talent has Rome brought forth, nor one to whom the law would be indebted more, if he the path of right had followed out. As it was, the corruption of the age ruined the city when desire for office, pomp, and the power which wealth gives, ever to be dreaded, had swept away his wavering mind with sidelong flood, and the change of Curio, snared by the spoils of Gaul and the gold of Cæsar, was that which turned the tide of history. Although mighty Sulla, fierce Marius, the blood-bespattered Cinna, and all the line of Cæsar's house have held our throats at their mercy with the sword, to whom was e'er such power vouchsafed? All others bought, _he_ sold the state."
Gaius Matius, a Friend of Cæsar
"_Non enim Cæsarem ... sum secutus, sed amicum_."
Gaius Matius, the subject of this sketch, was neither a great warrior, nor statesman, nor writer. If his claim to remembrance rested on what he did in the one or the other of these rôles, he would long ago have been forgotten. It is his genius for friendship which has kept his memory green, and that is what he himself would have wished. Of his early life we know little, but it does not matter much, because the interest which he has for us centres about his relations to Cæsar in early manhood. Being of good birth, and a man of studious tastes, he probably attended the University at Athens, and heard lectures there as young Cicero and Messala did at a later period. He must have been a man of fine tastes and cultivation, for Cicero, in writing to a friend, bestows on Matius the title "doctissimus," the highest literary compliment which one Roman could pay another, and Apollodorus of Pergamum dedicated to him his treatise on rhetoric. Since he was born about 84 B.C., he returned from his years of study at Athens about the time when Cæsar was setting out on his brilliant campaign in Gaul. Matius joined him, attracted perhaps by the personal charms of the young proconsul, perhaps by the love of adventure, perhaps, like his friend Trebatius, by the hope of making a reputation.
At all events he was already with Cæsar somewhere in Gaul in 53 B.C., and it is hard to think of an experience better suited to lay bare the good and the bad qualities in Cæsar's character than the years of camp life which Matius spent with him in the wilds of Gaul and Britain. As aide-de-camp, or orderly, for such a position he probably held, his place was by Cæsar's side. They forded the rivers together, walked or rode through woodland or open side by side, shared the same meagre rations, and lay in the same tent at the end of the day's march, ready to spring from the ground at a moment's warning to defend each other against attack from the savage foe. Cæsar's narrative of his campaigns in Gaul is a soldier's story of military movements, and perhaps from our school-boy remembrance of it we may have as little a liking for it as Horace had for the poem of Livius Andronicus, which he studied under "Orbilius of the rods," but even the obscurities of the Latin subjunctive and ablative cannot have blinded us entirely to the romance of the desperate siege of Alesia and the final struggle which the Gauls made to drive back the invader. Matius shared with Cæsar all the hardships and perils of that campaign, and with Cæsar he witnessed the final scene of the tragedy when Vercingetorix, the heroic Gallic chieftain, gave up his sword, and the conquest of Gaul was finished. It is little wonder that Matius and the other young men who followed Cæsar were filled with admiration of the man who had brought all this to pass.
It was a notable group, including Trebatius, Hirtius, Pansa, Oppius, and Matius in its number. All of them were of the new Rome. Perhaps they were dimly conscious that the mantle of Tiberius Gracchus had fallen upon their leader, that the great political struggle which had been going on for nearly a century was nearing its end, and that they were on the eve of a greater victory than that at Alesia. It would seem that only two of them, Matius and Trebatius, lived to see the dawning of the new day. But it was not simply nor mainly the brilliancy of Cæsar as a leader in war or in politics which attracted Matius to him. As he himself puts it in his letter to Cicero: "I did not follow a Cæsar, but a friend." Lucullus and Pompey had made as distinguished a record in the East as Cæsar had in the West, but we hear of no such group of able young men following their fortunes as attached themselves to Cæsar. We must find a reason for the difference in the personal qualities of Cæsar, and there is nothing that more clearly proves the charm of his character than the devotion to him of this group of men. In the group Matius is the best representative of the man and the friend. When Cæsar came into his own, Matius neither asked for nor accepted the political offices which Cæsar would gladly have given him. One needs only to recall the names of Antony, Labienus, or Decimus Brutus to realize the fact that Cæsar remembered and rewarded the faithful services of his followers. But Matius was Cæsar's friend and nothing more, not his master of the horse, as Antony was, nor his political and financial heir, as Octavius was. In his loyalty to Cæsar he sought for no other reward than Cæsar's friendship, and his services to him brought with them their own return. Indeed, through his friend he suffered loss, for one of Cæsar's laws robbed him of a part of his estate, as he tells us, but this experience did not lessen his affection. How different his attitude was from that of others who professed a friendship for Cæsar! Some of them turned upon their leader and plotted against his life, when disappointed in the favors which they had received at his hands, and others, when he was murdered, used his name and his friendship for them to advance their own ambitious designs. Antony and Octavius struggle with each other to catch the reins of power which have fallen from his hands; Dolabella, who seems to regard himself as an understudy of Cæsar, plays a serio-comic part in Rome in his efforts to fill the place of the dead dictator; while Decimus Brutus hurries to the North to make sure of the province which Cæsar had given him.
From these men, animated by selfishness, by jealousy, by greed for gain, by sentimentalism, or by hypocritical patriotism, Matius stands aloof, and stands perhaps alone. For him the death of Cæsar means the loss of a friend, of a man in whom he believed. He can find no common point of sympathy either with those who rejoice in the death of the tyrant, as Cicero does, for he had not thought Cæsar a tyrant, nor with those who use the name of Cæsar to conjure with. We have said that he accepted no political office. He did accept an office, that of procurator, or superintendent, of the public games which Cæsar had vowed on the field of Pharsalus, but which death had stepped in to prevent him from giving, and it was in the pious fulfilment of this duty which he took upon himself that he brought upon his head the anger of the "auctores libertatis," as he ironically calls them. He had grieved, too, at the death of Cæsar, although "a man ought to rate the fatherland above a friend," as the liberators said. Matius took little heed of this talk. He had known of it from the outset, but it had not troubled him. Yet when it came to his ears that his friend Cicero, to whom he had been attached from boyhood, to whom he had proved his fidelity at critical moments, was among his accusers, he could not but complain bitterly of the injustice. Through a common friend, Trebatius, whose acquaintance he had made in Gaul, he expresses to Cicero the sorrow which he feels at his unkindness. What Cicero has to say in explanation of his position and in defence of himself, we can do no better than to give in his own words:
"_Cicero to Matins, greeting:_[145]
"I am not yet quite clear in my own mind whether our friend Trebatius,
who is as loyal as he is devoted to both of us, has brought me more
sorrow or pleasure: for I reached my Tusculan villa in the evening, and
the next day, early in the morning, he came to see me, though he had
not yet recovered his strength. When I reproved him for giving too
little heed to his health, he said that nothing was nearer his heart
than seeing me. 'There's nothing new,' say I? He told me of your
grievance against me, yet before I make any reply in regard to it, let
me state a few facts.
"As far back as I can recall the past I have no friend of longer
standing than you are; but long duration is a thing characteristic of
many friendships, while love is not. I loved you on the day I met you,
and I believed myself loved by you. Your subsequent departure, and that
too for a long time, my electoral canvass, and our different modes of
life did not allow our inclination toward one another to be
strengthened by intimacy; still I saw your feeling toward me many years
before the Civil War, while Cæsar was in Gaul; for the result which you
thought would be of great advantage to me and not of disadvantage to
Cæsar himself you accomplished: I mean in bringing him to love me, to
honor me, to regard me as one of his friends. Of the many confidential
communications which passed between us in those days, by word of mouth,
by letter, by message, I say nothing, for sterner times followed. At
the breaking out of the Civil War, when you were on your way toward
Brundisium to join Cæsar, you came to me to my Formian villa. In the
first place, how much did that very fact mean, especially at those
times! Furthermore, do you think I have forgotten your counsel, your
words, the kindness you showed? I remember that Trebatius was there.
Nor indeed have I forgotten the letter which you sent to me after
meeting Cæsar, in the district near Trebula, as I remember it. Next
came that ill-fated moment when either my regard for public opinion, or
my sense of duty, or chance, call it what you will, compelled me to go
to Pompey. What act of kindness or thoughtfulness either toward me in
my absence or toward my dear ones in Rome did you neglect? In fact,
whom have all my friends thought more devoted to me and to themselves
than you are? I came to Brundisium. Do you think I have forgotten in
what haste, as soon as you heard of it, you came hurrying to me from
Tarentum? How much your presence meant to me, your words of cheer to a
courage broken by the fear of universal disaster! Finally, our life at
Rome began. What element did our friendship lack? In most important
matters I followed your advice with reference to my relations toward
Cæsar; in other matters I followed my own sense of duty. With whom but
myself, if Cæsar be excepted, have you gone so far as to visit his
house again and again, and to spend there many hours, oftentimes in the
most delightful discourse? It was then too, if you remember, that you
persuaded me to write those philosophical essays of mine. After his
return, what purpose was more in your thoughts than to have me as good
a friend of Cæsar as possible? This you accomplished at once.
"What is the point, then, of this discourse, which is longer than I had
intended it should be? This is the point, that I have been surprised
that you, who ought to see these things, have believed that I have
taken any step which is out of harmony with our friendly relations, for
beside these facts which I have mentioned, which are undisputed and
self-evident facts, there are many more intimate ties of friendship
which I can scarcely put in words. Everything about you charms me, but
most of all, on the one hand, your perfect loyalty in matters of
friendship, your wisdom, dignity, steadfastness; on the other hand,
your wit, refinement, and literary tastes.
"Wherefore--now I come back to the grievance--in the first place, I did
not think that you had voted for that law; in the second place, if I
had thought so, I should never have thought that you had done it
without some sufficient reason. Your position makes whatever you do
noticeable; furthermore, envy puts some of your acts in a worse light
than the facts warrant. If you do not hear these rumors I do not know
what to say. So far as I am concerned, if I ever hear them I defend you
as I know that _I_ am always defended by _you_ against _my_ detractors.
And my defence follows two lines: there are some things which I always
deny _in toto_, as, for instance, the statement in regard to that very
vote; there are other acts of yours which I maintain were dictated by
considerations of affection and kindness, as, for instance, your action
with reference to the management of the games. But it does not escape
you, with all your wisdom, that, if Cæsar was a king--which seems to me
at any rate to have been the case--with respect of your duty two
positions may be maintained, either the one which I am in the habit of
taking, that your loyalty and friendship to Cæsar are to be praised, or
the one which some people take, that the freedom of one's fatherland is
to be esteemed more than the life of one's friend. I wish that my
discussions springing out of these conversations had been repeated to
you.
"Indeed, who mentions either more gladly or more frequently than I the
two following facts, which are especially to your honor? The fact that
you were the most influential opponent of the Civil War, and that you
were the most earnest advocate of temperance in the moment of victory,
and in this matter I have found no one to disagree with me. Wherefore I
am grateful to our friend Trebatius for giving me an opportunity to
write this letter, and if you are not convinced by it, you will think
me destitute of all sense of duty and kindness; and nothing more
serious to me than that or more foreign to your own nature can happen."
In all the correspondence of Cicero there is not a letter written with more force and delicacy of feeling, none better suited to accomplish its purpose than this letter to Matius. It is a work of art; but in that fact lies its defect, and in that respect it is in contrast to the answer which it called forth from Matius, The reply of Matius stands on a level with another better-known non-Ciceronian epistle, the famous letter of condolence which Servius wrote to Cicero after the death of Cicero's daughter, Tullia; but it is finer, for, while Servius is stilted and full of philosophical platitudes, Matius, like Shakespeare's Antony, "only speaks right on," in telling Cicero of his grief at Cæsar's death, of his indignation at the intolerant attitude of the assassins, and his determination to treasure the memory of Cæsar at any cost. This is his letter:
"_Matius to Cicero, greeting_[146]
"I derived great pleasure from your letter, because I saw that you held
such an opinion about me as I had hoped you would hold, and wished you
to hold; and although, in regard to that opinion, I had no misgivings,
still, inasmuch as I considered it a matter of the greatest importance,
I was anxious that it should continue unchanged. And then I was
conscious of having done nothing to offend any good citizen; therefore
I was the less inclined to believe that you, endowed as you are with so
many excellent qualities, could be influenced by any idle rumors,
especially as my friendship toward you had been and was sincere and
unbroken. Since I know that matters stand in this respect as I have
wished them to stand, I will reply to the charges, which you have often
refuted in my behalf in such a way as one would expect from that
kindness of heart characteristic of you and from our friendship. It is
true that what men said against me after the death of Cæsar was known
to me. They call it a sin of mine that I sorrow over the death of a man
dear to me, and because I grieve that he whom I loved is no more, for
they say that 'fatherland should be above friendship,' just as if they
had proved already that his death has been of service to the state. But
I will make no subtle plea. I confess that I have not attained to your
high philosophic planes; for, on the one hand, in the Civil War I did
not follow a Cæsar, but a friend, and although I was grieved at the
state of things, still I did not desert him; nor, on the other hand,
did I at any time approve of the Civil War, nor even of the reason for
strife, which I most earnestly sought to extinguish when it was
kindling. Therefore, in the moment of victory for one bound to me by
the closest ties, I was not captivated by the charm either of public
office or of gold, while his other friends, although they had less
influence with him than I, misused these rewards in no small degree.
Nay, even my own property was impaired by a law of Cæsar's, thanks to
which very law many who rejoice at the death of Cæsar have remained at
Rome. I have worked as for my own welfare that conquered citizens might
be spared.
"Then may not I, who have desired the welfare of all, be indignant
that he, from whom this favor came, is dead? especially since the very
men who were forgiven have brought him both unpopularity and death. You
shall be punished, then, they say, 'since you dare to disapprove of our
deed.' Unheard of arrogance, that some men glory in their crime, that
others may not even sorrow over it without punishment! But it has
always been the unquestioned right, even of slaves, to fear, to
rejoice, to grieve according to the dictates of their own feelings
rather than at the bidding of another man; of these rights, as things
stand now, to judge from what these champions of freedom keep saying,
they are trying to deprive us by intimidation; but their efforts are
useless. I shall never be driven by the terrors of any danger from the
path of duty or from the claims of friendship, for I have never thought
that a man should shrink from an honorable death; nay, I have often
thought that he should seek it. But why are they angry at me, if I wish
them to repent of their deed? for I desire to have Cæsar's death a
bitter thing to all men.
"'But I ought as a citizen to desire the welfare of the state.' Unless
my life in the past and my hope for the future, without words from me,
prove that I desire that very end, I do not seek to establish the fact
by words. Wherefore I beg you the more earnestly to consider deeds more
than words, and to believe, if you feel that it is well for the right
to prevail, that I can have no intercourse with dishonorable men. For
am I now, in my declining years, to change that course of action which
I maintained in my youth, when I might even have gone astray with hope
of indulgence, and am I to undo my life's work? I will not do so. Yet I
shall take no step which may be displeasing to any man, except to
grieve at the cruel fate of one most closely bound to me, of one who
was a most illustrious man. But if I were otherwise minded, I would
never deny what I was doing lest I should be regarded as shameless in
doing wrong, a coward and a hypocrite in concealing it.
"'Yet the games which the young Cæsar gave in memory of Cæsar's victory
I superintended.' But that has to do with my private obligation and not
with the condition of the state; a duty, however, which I owed to the
memory and the distinguished position of a dear friend even though he
was dead, a duty which I could not decline when asked by a young man of
most excellent promise and most worthy of Cæsar. 'I even went
frequently to the house of the consul Antony to pay my respects!' to
whom you will find that those who think that I am lacking in devotion
to my country kept coming in throngs to ask some favor forsooth or
secure some reward. But what arrogance this is that, while Cæsar never
interfered with my cultivating the friendship of men whom I pleased,
even when he himself did not like them, these men who have taken my
friend from me should try to prevent me by their slander from loving
those whom I will.
"But I am not afraid lest the moderation of my life may prove too weak
to withstand false reports, or that even those who do not love me
because of my loyalty to Cæsar may not prefer to have friends like me
rather than like themselves. So far as I myself am concerned, if what I
prefer shall be my lot, the life which is left me I shall spend in
retirement at Rhodes; but if some untoward circumstance shall prevent
it, I shall live at Rome in such a wise as to desire always that right
be done. Our friend Trebatius I thank heartily in that he has disclosed
your sincere and friendly feeling toward me, and has shown me that him
whom I have always loved of my own free will I ought with the more
reason to esteem and honor. Bene vale et me dilige."
With these words our knowledge of Matius comes almost to an end. His life was prolonged into the imperial period, and, strangely enough, in one of the few references to him which we find at a later date, he is characterized as "the friend of Augustus" (divi Augusti amicus). It would seem that the affection which he felt for Cæsar he transferred to Cæsar's heir and successor. He still holds no office or title. In this connection it is interesting to recall the fact that we owe the best of Cicero's philosophical work to him, the "Academics," the "De Finibus," and the "Tusculan Questions," for Cicero tells us in his letter that he was induced to write his treatises on philosophy by Matius. It is a pleasant thing to think that to him we may also be indebted for Cicero's charming essay "On Friendship." The later life of Matius, then, we may think was spent in retirement, in the study of philosophy, and in the pursuit of literature. His literary pursuits give a homely and not unpleasant touch to his character. They were concerned with gastronomy, for Columella, in the first century of our era, tells us[147] that Matius composed three books, bearing the titles of "The Cook," "The Butler," and "The Picklemaker," and his name was transmitted to a later generation in a dish known as "mincemeat à la Matius" (_minutal Matianum_).[148] He passes out of the pages of history in the writings of Pliny the Elder as the man who "invented the practice of clipping shrubbery."[149] To him, then, we perhaps owe the geometrical figures, and the forms of birds and beasts which shrubs take in the modern English garden. His memory is thus ever kept green, whether in a way that redounds to his credit or not is left for the reader to decide.
Index
Acta Diurna. Anoyran monument. Anglo-Saxons, compared with Romans, in government; in private affairs. Arval Hymn, the. Ascoli's theory of the differentiation of the Romance languages. Augustus, "Res Gestæ"; his benefactions.
Batha, a municipal expense.
Benefactions, private,
co-operation with the government;
_objects_;
comparison of ancient and modern objects;
of Æmilius;
of Pompey;
of Augustus;
motives;
expected of prominent men;
attempts at regulation;
a recognized responsibility;
a legal obligation on municipal officials;
offices thereby limited to the rich;
of rich private citizens;
effect on municipal life and character;
on private citizens;
charity.
Burial societies.
Cælius, estimate of Curio.
Cæsar,
expenditures as sedile;
and Curio;
secures Curio as agent in Rome;
unprepared for civil war;
_et passim_ in chapters on Curio and Matius.
Cato the elder, his diction.
Charity.
Church, the Christian, influence on the spread of Latin.
Cicero,
quotation from a letter in colloquial style;
his "corrupt practices act,";
and Scaptius;
and Curio;
_correspondence_ with Matius.
Civic pride of Romans.
Civil war, outbreak of.
Combinations in restraint of trade;
government intervention.
Common people,
their language logical;
progressive and conservative elements.
Common people of Rome,
their language (see _Latin, colloquial_);
their religious beliefs;
philosophy of life;
belief in future life.
Controversiae of the schools of rhetoric.
Corporations;
aid the government;
collect taxes;
in politics;
many small stockholders.
Cromer, Lord, "Ancient and Modern Imperialism,".
Curio,
funeral games in his father's honor;
character;
family;
relations with Cicero;
beginning of public life;
relations with Cæsar;
openly espouses Cæsar's cause;
popularity;
as quæstor;
in the Clodian affair;
Cælius's opinion of him;
as tribune;
relations with Pompey;
forces conservatives to open hostilities;
his part in the civil war;
death.
Dacia, Latin in.
Dialects in Italy, their disappearance.
Diez, the Romance philologist.
Diocletian's policy;
his edict to regulate prices;
content;
discovery of document;
amount extant;
date;
style;
provisions of the edict;
extracts;
discussion;
made prices uniform;
its prices are retail;
interesting deductions;
effect;
repeal.
English language in India.
Epitaphs,
deal with the common people;
length of Roman epitaphs;
along Appian Way;
sentiments expressed;
show religious beliefs;
gods rarely named;
Mother Earth.
Epitaphs, metrical,
praises of women predominate;
literary merit;
art.
Étienne, Henri, first scholar to notice colloquial Latin.
Food,
cost of, comparison with to-day;
free distribution of.
Gracchi, the.
Greek language,
in Italy;
not conquered by Latin;
influence on Latin.
Gröber's theory of the differentiation of the Romance languages;
criticism of.
Guilds;
were non-political;
inscriptional evidence;
comparison of conditions in East and West;
objects;
dinners;
temples;
rules;
no attempts to raise wages;
religious character;
began to enter politics;
attitude of government toward;
decline.
Hempl's theory of language rivalry. Horace, his "curiosa felicitas,".
Inscription from Pompeii, in colloquial Latin.
Julia, death of. Julian's edict to regulate the price of grain.
Labor-unions. (See _Guilds_.)
Lactantius, "On the Deaths of Those Who Persecuted (the Christians),".
Languages spoken in Italy in the early period;
influence of other languages on Latin, 22. (See also _Greek_.)
Latin language,
extent;
unifying influences;
uniformity;
evidence of inscriptions;
causes of its spread;
colonies;
roads;
merchants;
soldiers;
government officials;
the church;
its superiority not a factor;
sentiment a cause;
"peaceful invasion,".
Latin, colloquial, its study neglected till recently;
first noticed in modern times by Henri Étienne;
its forms, how determined;
ancient authority for its existence;
evidence of the Romance languages;
aid derived from a knowledge of spoken English;
analytical formation of tenses;
slang;
extant specimens;
causes of variation;
external influences on;
influence of culture;
definition of colloquial Latin;
relation to literary Latin;
careless pronunciation;
accent different from literary Latin;
confusion of genders;
monotonous style;
tendencies in vocabulary, 64-7:
in syntax;
effect of loss of final letters;
reunion with literary Latin;
still exists in the Romance languages;
date when it became the separate Romance language;
specimens quoted.
Latin, literary,
modelled on Greek;
relation to colloquial Latin;
standardized by grammarians;
style unnatural;
reunion with colloquial Latin;
disappearance.
Latin, preliterary.
Laws of the Twelve Tables;
excerpt from.
Living, cost of, comparison with to-day.
Livius Andronicus.
Lucan's account of the death of Curio.
Matius, Gaius,
early life and character;
with Cæsar in Gaul;
friendship with Cæsar, _passim_;
accepted no office;
devotion to Cæsar;
unpopularity due to it;
correspondence with Cicero;
defence of his devotion to Cæsar;
prompted Cicero's best philosophical works;
later life;
literary works.
Menippean satire.
Milesian tales.
Money, unit of.
Nævius. Ninus romance; and Petronius.
Organization, of capitalists (see _Corporations_); of labor (see _Guilds_). Oscan.
Paternalism,
beginnings of, in Rome;
effect on people.
Patron, office of;
benefactions of.
Pervigilium Veneris.
Petronius, Satiræ;
excerpt from;
original size;
motif;
Trimalchio's Dinner;
satirical spirit;
literary criticism;
Horatian humor;
cynical attitude;
realism;
prose-poetic form;
origin of this genre of literature;
the Satiræ and the epic;
and the heroic romance;
and the Menippean satire;
and the Milesian tale;
and the prologue of comedy;
and the mime;
the Satiræ perhaps a mixture of many types;
originated with Petronius.
Plautus.
Poetry of the common people,
dedicatory;
ephemeral;
graffiti;
borrowed from the Augustan poets;
folk poetry;
children's jingles.
Pompey,
his benefactions;
ordered to march against Cæsar;
_et passim_ in chapter on Curio.
Prices,
controlled by corporations;
attempts at government regulation.
Probus, the "Appendix" of.
Prose-poetic form.
Ritschl, the Plautine scholar.
Romance, the realistic, origin obscure.
(See _Petronius, Satiræ_.)
Romance languages,
causes of their differentiation, Gröber's theory;
Ascoli's theory;
date of their beginning;
descended from colloquial Latin;
reasons of their agreement;
common source.
Romances, the Greek, theory of origin.
Salaries of municipal officers. (See also _Wages_.) Scaptius and Cicero. Seneca the elder, "Controversiæ,". Strasburg oath. Strikes.
Theatres a municipal expense. Trimalchio's Dinner.
Umbrian. Urso, constitution of.
Wages in Roman times;
compared with to-day;
and guilds;
and slavery.
(See also _Salaries_.)
Footnotes
[1] _Cf._ A. Ernout, _Le Parler de Préneste_, Paris, 1905.
[2] The relation between Latin and the Italic dialects may be illustrated by an extract or two from them with a Latin translation. An Umbrian specimen may be taken from one of the bronze tablets found at Iguvium, which reads in Umbrian: Di Grabouie, saluo seritu ocrem Fisim, saluam seritu totam Iiouinam (_Iguvinian Tables_ VI, a. 51), and in Latin: Deus Grabovi, salvam servato arcem Fisiam, salvam servato civitatem Iguvinam. A bit of Oscan from the Tabula Bantina (Tab. Bant. 2, 11) reads: suaepis contrud exeic fefacust auti comono hipust, molto etanto estud, and in Latin: siquis contra hoc fecerit aut comitia habuerit, multa tanta esto.
[3] _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, IX, 782, furnishes a case in point.
[4] _Cf._ G. Mohl, _Introduction à la chronologie du Latin vulgaire_, Paris, 1899.
[5] Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encyclopadie_, IV, 1179 _ff._
[6] Marquardt, _Römische Staatsverwaltung_, II, p. 463.
[7] _Cf._, _e.g._, Pirson, _La langue des inscriptions Latines de la Gaule_, Bruxelles, 1901; Carnoy, _Le Latin d'Espagne d'après les inscriptions_, Bruxelles, 1906; Hoffmann, _De titulis Africæ Latinis quæstiones phoneticæ_, 1907; Kuebler, _Die lateinische Sprache auf afrikanischen Inschriften_ (_Arch, für lat. Lex._, vol. VIII), and Martin, _Notes on the Syntax of the Latin Inscriptions Found in Spain_, Baltimore, 1909.
[8] _Cf._ L. Hahn, _Rom und Romanismus im griechisch-römischen Osten_ (esp. pp. 222-268), Leipzig, 1906.
[9] _Proceedings of the American Philological Association_, XXIX (1898), pp. 31-47. For a different theory of the results of language-conflict, _cf._ Gröber, _Grundriss der romanischen Philologie_, I, pp. 516, 517.
[10] A very interesting sketch of the history of the Latin language in this region may be seen in Ovide Densusianu's _Histoire de la langue Roumaine_, Paris, 1902.
[11] Gorra, _Lingue Neolatine_, pp. 66-68.
[12] Gröber, _Grundriss der romanischen Philologie_, pp. 517 and 524.
[13] _Cf._ Gröber in _Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik_, I, p. 210 _ff._
[14] _Is Modern-Language Teaching a Failure?_ Chicago, 1907.
[15] _Cf._ Abbott, _History of Rome_, pp. 246-249.
[16] Schuchardt, _Vokalismus des Vulgärlateins, I_, 103 _ff._
[17] _Cf._ Gröber, _Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik_, I, 45.
[18] Thielmann, _Archiv_, II, 48 _ff._; 157 _ff._
[19] From the "Laws of the Twelve Tables" of the fifth century B.C. See Bruns, _Fontes iuris Romani antiqui_, sixth edition, p. 31.
[20] _Appendix Probi_, in Keil's _Grammatici Latini_, IV, 197 _ff._
[21] "The Accent in Vulgar and Formal Latin," in _Classical Philology_, II (1907), 445 _ff._
[22] Bücheler, _Carmina Latina epigraphica_, No. 53. The originals of all the bits of verse which are translated in this paper may be found in the collection whose title is given here. Hereafter reference to this work will be by number only.
[23] No. 443.
[24] No. 92.
[25] No. 128.
[26] No. 127.
[27] No. 876.
[28] No. 1414.
[29] No. 765.
[30] No. 843.
[31] No. 95.
[32] No. 1578.
[33] Nos. 1192 and 1472.
[34] No. 1037.
[35] No. 1039.
[36] G. W. Van Bleek, Quae de hominum post mortem eondicione doceant carmina sepulcralia Latina.
[37] No. 1495.
[38] No. 1496.
[39] No. 86.
[40] No. 1465.
[41] No. 1143.
[42] No. 1559.
[43] No. 1433.
[44] No. 225.
[45] No. 143.
[46] No. 83.
[47] No. 1500.
[48] No. 190.
[49] No. 244.
[50] No. 1499.
[51] No. 856.
[52] Society and Politics in Ancient Rome, p. 183.
[53] No. 562.
[54] No. 52.
[55] No. 1251.
[56] No. 106.
[57] No. 967.
[58] No. 152.
[59] No. 1042.
[60] No. 1064.
[61] No. 98.
[62] Bücheler, _Carmina Latino epigraphica_, No. 899.
[63] No. 19.
[64] No. 866.
[65] No. 863.
[66] No. 937.
[67] No. 949.
[68] No. 943.
[69] No. 945.
[70] No. 354.
[71] _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, IV, 6892.
[72] Bücheler, No. 928.
[73] No. 333.
[74] No. 931.
[75] No. 933.
[76] No. 38.
[77] No. 270.
[78] Habeat scabiem quisquis ad me venerit novissimus.
[79] Rex erit qui recte faciet, qui non faciet non erit.
[80]
Gallos Cæsar in triumphum ducit, idem in curiam;
Galli bracas deposuerunt, latum clavom sumpserunt.
[81]
Brutus quia reges eiecit, consul primus factus est;
Hic quia consoles eiecit, rex postremo factus est.
[82] Salva Roma, salva patria, salvus est Germanicus.
[83] _Cf._ Schmid, "Der griechische Roman," _Neue Jahrb._, Bd XIII (1904), 465-85; Wilcken, in _Hermes_, XXVIII, 161 _ff._, and in _Archiv f. Papyrusforschung_, I, 255 _ff._; Grenfell-Hunt, _Fayûm Towns and Their Papyri_ (1900), 75 _ff._, and _Rivista di Filologia_, XXIII, I _ff._
[84] Some of the important late discussions of the Milesian tale are by Bürger, _Hermes_ (1892), 351 _ff._; Norden, _Die antike Kunstprosa_, II, 602, 604, n.; Rohde, _Kleine Schriften_, II, 25 _ff._; Bürger, _Studien zur Geschichte d. griech. Romans_, I (_Programm von Blankenburg a. H._, 1902); W. Schmid, _Neue Jahrb. f. d. klass. Alt._ (1904), 474 _ff._; Lucas, "Zu den Milesiaca des Aristides," _Philologus_, 61 (1907), 16 _ff._
[85] On the origin of the _prosimetrum cf._ Hirzel, _Der Dialog_, 381 _ff._; Norden, _Die antike Kunstprosa_, 755.
[86] _Cf._ Rosenbluth, _Beiträge zur Quellenkunde von Petrons Satiren_. Berlin, 1909.
[87] This theory in the main is suggested by Rohde, _Der griechische Roman_, 2d ed., 267 (Leipzig, 1900), and by Ribbeck, _Geschichte d. röm. Dichtung_, 2d ed., III, 150.
[88] _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, vol. III, pp. 1926-1953. Mommsen's text with a commentary has been published by H. Blümner, in _Der Maximaltarif des Diocletian_, Berlin, 1893. A brief description of the edict may be found in the Pauly-Wissowa _Real-Encyclopadie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft_, under "Edictum Diocletiani," and K. Bücher has discussed some points in it in the _Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft_, vol. L (1894), pp. 189-219 and 672-717.
[89] The method of arrangement may be illustrated by an extract from the first table, which deals with grain and vegetables.
[90] The present-day prices which are given in the third column of these two tables are taken from Bulletin No. 77 of the Bureau of Labor, and from the majority and minority reports of the Select Committee of the U.S. Senate on "Wages and Prices of Commodities" (Report, No. 912, Documents, Nos. 421 and 477). In setting down a number to represent the current price of an article naturally a rough average had to be struck of the rates charged in different parts of the country. Bulletin No. 77, for instance, gives the retail price charged for butter at 226 places in 68 different cities, situated in 39 different States. At one point in Illinois the price quoted in 1906 was 22 cents, while at a point in Pennsylvania 36 cents was reported, but the prevailing price throughout the country ranged from 26 to 32, so that these figures were set down in the table. A similar method has been adopted for the other items. A special difficulty arises in the case of beef, where the price varies according to the cut. The price of wheat is not given in the extant fragment of the edict, but has been calculated by Blümner from statements in ancient writers. So far as the wages of the ancient and modern workman are concerned we must remember that the Roman laborer in many cases received "keep" from his employer. Probably from one-third to three-sevenths should be added to his daily wage to cover this item. Statistics published by the Department of Agriculture show that the average wage of American farm laborers per month during 1910 was $27.50 without board and $19.21 with board. The item of board, therefore, is three-sevenths of the money paid to the laborer when he keeps himself. One other point of difference between ancient and modern working conditions must be borne in mind in attempting a comparison. We have no means of knowing the length of the Roman working day. However, it was probably much longer than our modern working day, which, for convenience' sake, is estimated at eight hours.
[91] Wholesale price in 1909.
[92] Receives "keep" also.
[93] Eight-hour day assumed.
[94] _Cf._ Report of the Commissioner of Labor, pp. 622-625. In England between one-third and one-fourth; _cf._ Bulletin, No. 77, p. 345.
[95] _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, II, 5489.
[96] Wilmanns, _Exempla Inscriptionum Latinarum_, 1772.
[97] _Ibid._, 2037.
[98] _Ibid._, 1859.
[99] _Ibid._, 2054.
[100] _Ibid._, 2099.
[101] 23:48_f._
[102] _Cic., ad Att._, 5.21. 10-13; 6.1. 5-7; 6.2.7; 6.3.5.
[103] 6.17.
[104] _Captivi_, 489 _ff._
[105] _Livy_, 38. 35.
[106] Plautus, _Pseudolus_, 189.
[107] Some of the most important discussions of workmen's guilds among the Romans are to be found in Waltzing's _Etude historique sur les corporations professionnelles chez les Romains_, 3 vols., Louvain, 1895-9; Liebenam's _Zur Geschichte und Organisation des römischen Vereinswesen_, Leipzig, 1890; Ziebarth's _Das Griechische Vereinswesen_, Leipzig, 1896, pp. 96-110; Kornemann's article, "Collegium," in the Pauly-Wissowa _Real Encyclopadie_. Other literature is cited by Waltzing, I, pp. 17-30, and by Kornemann, IV, columns 479-480.
[108] _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, XI, 5047.
[109] _Ibid._, V, 7906.
[110] _Ibid._, III, p. 953.
[111] _Ibid._, VIII, 14683.
[112] _Ibid._, III, 3583.
[113] _Ibid._, XIV, 2112.
[114] _Ibid._, XIV, 326.
[115] _E.g._, Clodius and Milo.
[116] Lucan, 4. 814 _ff._; Velleius, 2. 48; Pliny, Nat. Hist., 7. 116 _ff._
[117] Cicero, Brutus, 122, 210, 214.
[118] _Ibid._, 280.
[119] Cicero, _Epist. ad Fam._, 2. 1.
[120] Cicero, _Phil._, 2. 45 _f._
[121] Cicero, _ad Att._, 1. 14. 5.
[122] _Ibid._, 1. 14. 5.
[123] _Ibid._, 2. 12. 2.
[124] _Ibid._, 2.7.3; 2.8.1; 2.12.2.
[125] Suet., _Julius_, 52.
[126]_Ad Att._, 2. 19. 3.
[127] _Ad fam._, 2.4.
[128] _Ibid._, 2.6.
[129]_Ibid._, 8. 4. 2.
[130] Dio's account (40. 61) of Curio's course seems to harmonize with this interpretation.
[131] "Cicero, _ad fam._, 8.10.4.
[132] White's Civil Wars of Appian, 2.27.
[133] Cicero, _ad fam._, 8.6.5.
[134] Valerius Maximus, 9.1.6.
[135] Vell. Pat., 2.48.
[136] Civil Wars, 2.30.
[137] _Ad Att._, 6.9.4.
[138] Civil Wars of Appian, 2.31.
[139] Velleius Paterculus, 2.48.
[140] Cæsar, Civil War, 1. 12.
[141] _Ibid._, 1.182
[142] _Ibid._, 2.23.
[143] _Ibid._, 2.42.
[144] _Pharsalia_, 4. 807-824.
[145] Cicero, _Epistulæ ad famiares_, 11.27.
[146] Cicero, _Epist. ad fam._, 11.28.
[147] 12.46.1.
[148] Apicius, 4.174.
[149] _Naturalis Historia_, 12.13.
Comments
Log in to leave a comment.
The Common People of Ancient RomeChapter XXX (3)
0%34 min left in chapter