LUCIUS SERGIUS CATILINA Lucius Sergius Catilina Was A
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LUCIUS SERGIUS CATILINA Lucius Sergius Catilina was a patrician member of a noble family which had not provided Rome with a consul for more than three hundred years and whose decayed fortunes he was determined to revive. Endowed with military talents of distinction, he was a member of the staff of the consul Gnaeus Pompeius Strabo in 89 B.C. at the siege of the rebel town of Asculum. We have no evidence that he played any very active role during the 80's but he certainly remained secured under the Cinnan government. Indeed, he may have had family ties with Marians because a fragment of Sallust's Histories suggest that his wife was Gratidia, a sister of Marcus Marius Gratidianus, and his Marian connections were doubtless severed when expediency dictated the transfer of his decayed patrician family, and with the oligarchy established by him, that Catiline sought to restore his own family to fame. Early in the 70's he saw service abroad, possibly in Cilicia with Publius Servilius Vatia, who was proconsul there from 78 B.C. until 74 B.C. In 73 B.C. he was accused of adultery with the Vestal Virgin, Fabia, who was a half- sister of Cicero's wife. Among those who testified in his favor was Quintus Lutatius Catulus, the consul of 78 B.C. and now the principal leader of the Optimates. Catiline was acquitted. Elected praetor in 68 B.C., he was propraetorian governor of Africa in 67-66 B.C., but while he was still in the province an embassy appeared before the Senate with complaints about his conduct in office. On his return home he presented himself as a candidate in the consular elections for 65 B.C., but he was prevented from running in this election by the consul Lucius Volcanius Tullus. The complaints of the provincials had led to his indictment for extortion, and the case finally came before the court in 65 B.C. After a hearing in which he received the support of many consulares, he was acquitted, but not in time for him to stand in the consular elections for 64 B.C. In the elections for 63 B.C. Catiline was accepted as a candidate, and Cicero hoped that he would join him in his election campaign. There were five other candidates, of whom Gaius Antonius Hybrida (the uncle of Mark Antony) was believed to be the only serious rival. Catiline and Antonius were said to have been supported by Caesar and Crassus and joined forced in an effort to defeat Cicero, furthering their campaign with extensive bribery. To curb their lavish expenditures a measure was proposed which would increase the penalties for this offense, but the bill was vetoed by a tribune, Quintus Mucius Orestius. Cicero thereupon took advantage of the indignation this veto provoked in the Senate and delivered a speech, In Toga Candida, attacking his two rivals. The Optimates took fright and in default of a more suitable candidate helped Cicero in spite of his drawbacks --- his novitas, novus homo --- his support for Pompey and his equestrian connections --- to win the election as senior consul. Antonius came second and with a narrow lead over Catiline. Before the year was out Catiline survived another prosecution. at the insistence of the quaestor, Marcus Porcius Cato, men who had profited by the Sullan proscriptions were charged with murder, and the flood of cases swamped the Quaesitio de Scicariis, the murder court, one of the seven established or reconstituted by Sulla. As a result, aediles were forced to assist the praetors in charge and preside over trials for murder. Among these iudices quaesitionis was Caesar, who was closely linked with Pompey, prosecuted Catiline, the defendant was acquitted. As president of the court Caesar was not responsible for the verdict of the jury, but it does show that there existed influential men concerned to preserve Catiline from political extinction. Free once more to stand as a consular candidate in 63 B.C., he again suffered defeat, this time at the hands of Decimus Junius Silanus and Lucius Licinius Murena. This defeat was conclusive. The highest office in the State, the summit of his political ambitions, was not to be his by constitutional means, and it was the realization of this fact that turned Catiline into an active revolutionary preparing a coup d' etat in Rome and an insurrection in Italy. This was the only path now left open to him. In his speech In Toga Candida, delivered in the Summer of 64 B.C., Cicero alleges a series of crimes committed over the past two decades. He says that at the time of the Sullan proscriptions Catiline had cut off the head of Marcus Marius Gratidianus and carried it through the streets of Rome, and that he had murdered Quintus Caecilius, Marcus Volumnius and Lucius Tanusius; that he had been discreditably involved with the Vestal Fabia (Cicero could not make much of this affair as Catiline had been acquitted and Fabia was his own sister-in-law); that he had entered into an incestuous marriage with his daughter, whose name, Aurelia Orestilla, is supplied for us by Sallust. In the First Speech Against Catiline he adds the further allegation that after getting rid of his previous wife he committed another crime, the murder of his son. Two other writers add to his list. The author of the electioneering handbook, commentariolum petitionis, alleges that Catiline did away with his brother- in-law, a knight by the name of Quintus Caecilius, during the proscriptions. Plutarch relates that he killed his own brother and committed incest with his daughter. In his monograph Sallust is seeking to characterize Catiline as symptomatic of all that was evil at Rome and a man foredoomed by the corruptness of society to a life of crime and violence. We know that Sallust used speeches of Cicero for his own writing, and the crimes with which we are presented in the speech In Toga Candida would be just what he wanted to make good his case. Yet there are surprisingly few of them in his work. No mention of the murders by Sulla's lieutenant, and of his moral depravity only a reference to Fabia and then the murder of his son introduced to provide the driving force of his revolutionary designs. In speeches delivered after the consular elections of 63 B.C. Cicero makes further allegations about Catiline's earlier plots: that he planned to murder Cicero in 64 B.C., to murder Cicero and his rival candidates at the elections of 63 B.C., to kill the consuls and the other leading men on the 29th of December 66 B.C., to massacre the Senate on the same occasion and to take the place of one of the consulares for 65 B.C. who were to be murdered. These statements about Catiline's plans for violence at the end of 66 B.C. merit further study. In the speech In Toga Candida Cicero says that he will pass over the plot to massacre the Optimates, but the speech Pro Sulla can shed light on the origin of the myth. Cicero is engaged in the defense of Publius Cornelius Sulla and the prosecution has pointed out that in his letter to Pompey Cicero had linked the earlier affair with the conspiracy of 63 B.C. Cicero therefore has to extricate Sulla from complicity in 66 B.C., and one of the devices he employs is the substitution of Catiline for Sulla as a principal in the affair and the implication that Catiline was to have taken the place of one of the murdered consuls. Sallust accepts Cicero's story and gives Catiline the leading role. The story is highly appropriate for a man ever driven to violence and crime by the corruption of the times and by his bad conscience. POLICY AND SUPPORTERS The reasons for Catiline's emphasis upon his policy of tabulae novae, the cancellation of debts, are to be found in the economic conditions of the time. There had been previous occasions in Roman history when expenditures incurred in war had created widespread indebtedness and a serious shortage of currency, but the burden of debt had never been greater than in 63 B.C. The fighting of the 80's and again 78-77 B.C>, followed by the slave revolt of 73-71 B.C. with all the violence and devastation of the Italian countryside, led to a social and economic crisis which was made worse by the destruction of the pirates and the cost of the war against Mithridates. The pirates had caused increased prices for food and the expenditures incurred in defeating Mithridates had decreased the amount of money available for credit. The main grievances, however, were domestic in origin and concerned the plight of the urban poor and the exactions of the rich. The consequent hatred of the wealthy money-lenders fostered popular propaganda against the payment of debts, and at the beginning of 63 B.C. a bill for the cancellation of debts had actually been promoted but it was never passed. It was therefore sound politics for Catiline to make the cancellation of debts his prime concern. There were many in Italy, including the urban plebs, who were very ready to join a noble in refusing to pay their debts. In his Second Speech Against Catiline Cicero identifies six groups among Catiline's supporters: 1.) Wealthy men who are heavily in debt and who could repay their debt by selling land but are unwilling to do so.