Cicero: ORATORIA

[1] si tantum modo, Vatini, quid indignitas postularet spectare voluissem, fecissem id quod his vehementer placebat, ut te, cuius testimonium propter turpitudinem vitae sordisque domesticas nullius momenti putaretur, tacitus dimitterem; nemo enim horum aut ita te refutandum ut gravem adversarium aut ita rogandum ut religiosum testem arbitrabatur. sed fui paulo ante intemperantior fortasse quam debui; odio enim tui, in quo etsi omnis propter tuum in me scelus superare debeo, tamen ab omnibus paene vincor, sic sum incitatus ut, cum te non minus contemnerem quam odissem, tamen vexatum potius quam despectum vellem dimittere. qua re ne tibi hunc honorem a me haberi forte mirere,

[1] if only, Vatinius, I had wished to look to what indignity demanded, I would have done that which greatly pleased these men, namely that I, in silence, should dismiss you, whose testimony, on account of the foulness of life and domestic squalor, was thought to be of no moment; for none of these judged you either to be refuted as a weighty adversary or to be questioned as a religious (scrupulous) witness. but a little before I was perhaps more intemperate than I ought; for by hatred of you—in which, although I ought to surpass all because of your crime against me, yet I am surpassed by almost everyone—I am so incited that, although I contemned you no less than I hated you, nevertheless I wished to dismiss you harassed rather than despised. wherefore, lest you perhaps wonder that this honor is being paid to you by me,

[2] quod interrogem quem nemo congressu, nemo aditu, nemo suffragio, nemo civitate, nemo luce dignum putet, nulla me causa impulisset nisi ut ferocitatem istam tuam comprimerem et audaciam frangerem et loquacitatem paucis meis interrogationibus inretitam retardarem. etenim debuisti, Vatini, etiam si falso venisses in suspicionem P. Sestio, tamen mihi ignoscere, si in tanto hominis de me optime meriti periculo et tempori eius et voluntati parere voluissem.

[2] as to my questioning one whom no one deems worthy of meeting, no one of approach, no one of suffrage, no one of citizenship, no one of the light, no cause would have impelled me save that I might compress that ferocity of yours and shatter your audacity and, your loquacity ensnared by my few interrogations, retard it. For indeed you ought, Vatinius, even if you had falsely come into suspicion in regard to P. Sestius, nevertheless to pardon me, if, in the great peril of a man who has deserved most excellently of me, I had wished to comply both with his exigency and with his will.

[3] sed (te) hesterno (die) pro testimonio esse mentitum, cum adfirmares nullum tibi omnino cum Albinovano sermonem non modo de Sestio accusando, sed nulla umquam de re fuisse, paulo ante imprudens indicasti, qui et T. Claudium tecum communicasse et a te consilium P. Sesti accusandi petisse, et Albinovanum, quem antea vix tibi notum esse dixisses, domum tuam venisse, multa tecum locutum dixeris, denique contiones P. Sesti scriptas, quas neque nosset neque reperire posset, te Albinovano dedisse easque in hoc iudicio esse recitatas. in quo alterum es confessus, a te accusatores esse instructos et subornatos, in altero inconstantiam tuam cum levitate tum etiam periurio implicatam refellisti, cum, quem a te alienissimum esse dixisses, eum domi tuae fuisse, quem praevaricatorem esse ab initio iudicasses, ei te quos rogasset ad accusandum libros dixeris dedisse.

[3] but that (you) yesterday (day) lied in testimony, when you affirmed that you had had absolutely no conversation at all with Albinovanus—not only about accusing Sestius, but about any matter ever—you a little before unwittingly indicated, in that you said both that T. Claudius had communicated with you and had sought from you counsel for accusing P. Sestius, and that Albinovanus, whom you had previously said was scarcely known to you, had come to your house, that he had spoken much with you; finally, that the written contiones of P. Sestius, which he neither knew nor could find, you had given to Albinovanus, and that these had been read out in this judgment. in which you have confessed the one point, that by you the accusers were equipped and suborned; in the other you have refuted your own inconsistency, entangled both with levity and even with perjury, since the man whom you had said was most alien from you was at your house, and the man whom you had judged from the beginning to be a prevaricator, to him you said you had given the books for accusing which he had asked.

[II]

[2]

[4] nimium es vehemens feroxque natura: non putas fas esse verbum ex ore exire cuiusquam quod non iucundum et honorificum ad auris tuas accidat. venisti iratus omnibus; quod ego, simul ac te aspexi, prius quam loqui coepisti, cum ante Gellius, nutricula seditiosorum omnium, testimonium diceret, sensi atque providi. repente enim te tamquam serpens e latibulis oculis eminentibus, inflato collo, tumidis cervicibus intulisti, ut mihi renovatus ille tuus in to . . .

[4] you are excessively vehement and ferocious by nature: you do not think it lawful that any word should go forth from anyone’s mouth which does not fall upon your ears as pleasant and honorific. you came in angry at everyone; which I, as soon as I looked at you, before you began to speak, while Gellius, the nursemaid of all the seditious, was giving testimony, sensed and foresaw. for suddenly you thrust yourself in like a serpent from its lairs, with eyes protruding, neck inflated, tumid nape, so that to me that well-known thing of yours was renewed in to . . .

[5] . . . veterem meum amicum, sed tamen tuum familiarem, defenderim, cum in hac civitate oppugnatio soleat qua tu nunc uteris non numquam, defensio numquam vituperari. sed quaero a te cur C. Cornelium non defenderem: num legem aliquam Cornelius contra auspicia tulerit, num Aeliam, num Fufiam legem neglexerit, num consuli vim attulerit, num armatis hominibus templum tenuerit, num intercessorem vi deiecerit, num religiones polluerit, aerarium exhauserit, rem publicam compilarit? tua sunt, tua sunt haec omnia: Cornelio eius modi nihil obiectum est.

[5] . . . that I should have defended my old friend, yet nevertheless your familiar, since in this city assault—the kind which you are now using—is sometimes wont to be vituperated, defense never. But I ask you why I should not have defended Gaius Cornelius: did Cornelius carry any law against the auspices, did he neglect the Aelian law, or the Fufian law, did he bring force against a consul, did he hold a temple with armed men, did he cast down by force an intercessor, did he pollute religious observances, exhaust the treasury, plunder the commonwealth? These are yours, yours are all these things: against Cornelius nothing of this sort has been alleged.

codicem legisse dicebatur: defendebat testibus conlegis suis non se recitandi causa legisse, sed recognoscendi. constabat tamen Cornelium concilium illo die dimisisse, intercessioni paruisse. tu vero, cui Corneli defensio displicet, quam causam ad patronos tuos aut quod os adferes?

He was said to have read a codex: he defended himself, with witnesses—his colleagues—that he had read it not for the sake of reciting, but of recognizing (reviewing). Nevertheless, it was agreed that Cornelius dismissed the council on that day and obeyed the intercession. You, however, to whom Cornelius’s defense is displeasing, what cause will you bring to your patrons, or with what face will you present yourself?

quibus iam praescribis quanto illis probro futurum sit si te defenderint, cum tu mihi Corneli defensionem in maledictis obiciendam putaris.

to whom you already prescribe how great a reproach it will be for them if they defend you, whereas you have thought that the defense of Cornelius ought to be objected to me amid maledictions.

[6] ac tamen hoc, Vatini, memento, paulo post istam defensionem meam, quam tu bonis viris displicuisse dicis, me cum universi populi Romani summa voluntate tum optimi cuiusque singulari studio magnificentissime post hominum memoriam consulem factum, omniaque ea me pudenter vivendo consecutum esse quae tu impudenter vaticinando sperare te saepe dixisti.

[6] and yet this, Vatinius, remember: a little after that defense of mine, which you say displeased good men, I, both with the highest goodwill of the entire Roman people and with the singular zeal of each of the best men, was most magnificently made consul in living memory, and that by modest living I have attained all those things which you, by impudent vaticinating, have often said you hoped for.

[III] nam quod mihi discessum obiecisti meum, et quod horum, quibus ille dies acerbissimus fuit qui idem tibi laetissimus, luctum et gemitum renovare voluisti, tantum tibi respondeo me, cum tu ceteraeque rei publicae pestes armorum causam quaereretis, et cum per meum nomen fortunas locupletium diripere, sanguinem principum civitatis exsorbere, crudelitatem vestram odiumque diuturnum quod in bonos iam inveteratum habebatis saturare cuperetis, scelus et furorem vestrum cedendo maluisse frangere quam resistendo.

[3] for as to your having thrown my departure in my teeth, and your having wished to renew the mourning and groaning of those for whom that day was most bitter which was to you the gladdest, I answer you only this: that when you and the other plagues of the republic were seeking a casus belli, and when, by my name, you were eager to plunder the fortunes of the wealthy, to suck out the blood of the chiefs of the state, to sate your cruelty and the long-enduring hatred which you already held inveterate against good men, I preferred to break your crime and frenzy by yielding rather than by resisting.

[7] qua re peto a te ut mihi ignoscas, Vatini, ei cum patriae pepercerim quam servaram, et, si ego te perditorem et vexatorem rei publicae fero, tu me conservatorem et custodem feras. deinde eius viri discessum increpas quem vides omnium civium desiderio, ipsius denique rei publicae luctu esse revocatum. at enim dixisti non mea sed rei publicae causa homines de meo reditu laborasse: quasi vero quisquam vir excellenti animo in rem publicam ingressus optabilius quicquam arbitretur quam se a suis civibus rei publicae causa diligi!

[7] Wherefore I ask you to pardon me, Vatinius, for having spared the fatherland which I had saved; and, if I bear you as a destroyer and vexer of the republic, do you bear me as a preserver and guardian. Then you censure the departure of that man whom you see to have been recalled by the longing of all the citizens, by the very mourning of the republic itself. But indeed you said that men labored for my return not for my sake but for the sake of the republic: as if, in truth, any man of excellent spirit, having entered into public life, would deem anything more desirable than to be loved by his fellow citizens for the sake of the republic!

[8] scilicet aspera mea natura, difficilis aditus, gravis vultus, superba responsa, insolens vita; nemo consuetudinem meam, nemo humanitatem, nemo consilium, nemo auxilium requirebat; cuius desiderio, ut haec minima dicam, forum maestum, muta curia, omnia denique bonarum artium studia siluerunt. sed nihil sit factum mea causa: omnia illa senatus consulta, populi iussa, Italiae totius, cunctarum societatum, conlegiorum omnium decreta de me rei publicae causa esse facta fateamur. quid ergo, homo imperitissime solidae laudis ac verae dignitatis, praestantius mihi potuit accidere?

[8] Of course—my nature is rough, access to me difficult, a grave countenance, proud responses, an insolent life; no one was seeking my familiarity, no one my humanity, no one my counsel, no one my aid; at the desire for whom—to say these very least things—the forum was mournful, the curia mute, and, in fine, all the studies of the good arts fell silent. But let nothing be held to have been done for my sake: let us admit that all those decrees of the senate, the commands of the people, the decreta of all Italy, of all the societies, of all the colleges, concerning me, were made for the sake of the republic. What then, O man most unskilled in solid praise and true dignity, more outstanding could have befallen me?

quid optabilius ad immortalitatem gloriae atque in memoriam mei nominis sempiternam, quam omnis hoc civis meos iudicare, civitatis salutem cum unius mea salute esse coniunctam?

what could be more to be desired for the immortality of glory and for the sempiternal memory of my name, than that all these my citizens judge that the safety of the state is conjoined with the safety of one—myself?

[9] quod quidem ego tibi reddo tuum; nam ut tu me carum esse dixisti senatui populoque Romano non tam mea causa quam rei publicae, sic ego te, quamquam es omni diritate atque immanitate taeterrimus, tamen dico esse odio civitati non tam tuo quam rei publicae nomine.

[9] which indeed I render back to you as your own; for just as you said that I was dear to the senate and the Roman people not so much for my sake as for that of the commonwealth, so I say that you, although in every direness and immanity you are most loathsome, are nevertheless an object of hatred to the state not so much in your own name as in the name of the commonwealth.

[IV] atque ut aliquando ad te veniam, de me hoc sit extremum. quid quisque nostrum de se ipse loquatur, non est sane requirendum: boni viri (quid dicant), id est maximi momenti et ponderis.

[4] and that I may at last come to you, let this be the final thing about me. what each of us says about himself is surely not to be required: what good men (say), that is of the greatest moment and weight.

[10] duo sunt tempora quibus nostrorum civium spectentur iudicia de nobis, unum honoris, alterum salutis. honos tali populi Romani voluntate paucis est delatus ac mihi, salus tanto studio civitatis nemini reddita. de te autem homines quid sentiant in honore experti sumus, in salute exspectamus.

[10] There are two times at which the judgments of our fellow citizens concerning us are observed: one of honor, the other of safety. Honor, by such a will of the Roman people, has been conferred upon few—and upon me; safety, with so great a zeal on the part of the State, has been restored to no one. But concerning you, what people feel in the matter of honor we have experienced; in the matter of safety we are waiting.

sed tamen ne me cum his principibus civitatis qui adsunt P. Sestio, sed ut tecum, cum homine uno non solum impudentissimo (sed etiam sordidissimo) atque infimo, conferam, de te ipso, homine et adrogantissimo et mihi inimicissimo, quaero, Vatini, utrum tandem putes huic civitati, huic rei publicae, huic urbi, his templis, aerario, curiae, viris his quos vides, horum bonis fortunis liberis, civibus ceteris, denique deorum immortalium delubris auspiciis religionibus melius fuisse et praestabilius me civem in hac civitate nasci an te? Cum mihi hoc responderis, aut ita impudenter ut manus a te homines vix abstinere possint, aut ita dolenter ut aliquando ista quae sunt inflata rumpantur, tum memoriter respondeto ad ea quae te de te ipso rogaro.

but yet, so that I may not compare myself with those chiefs of the state who are present for P. Sestius, but as with you, with one man not only most impudent (but also most sordid) and lowest, I ask about you yourself, a man most arrogant and most inimical to me, Vatinus, whether at length you think it was better and more preferable for this commonwealth, this republic, this city, these temples, the treasury, the curia, these men whom you see, the goods, fortunes, and children of these, the other citizens, finally the shrines, auspices, and religions of the immortal gods, that I be born a citizen in this city or you? When you shall have answered this to me, either so shamelessly that men can scarcely keep their hands off you, or so painfully that at some time those things which are puffed up may burst, then answer by heart to those things which I shall ask you about yourself.

[V]

[5]

[11] atque illud tenebricosissimum tempus ineuntis aetatis tuae patiar latere. licet impune per me parietes in adulescentia perfoderis, vicinos compilaris, matrem verberaris: habeat hoc praemi tua indignitas, ut adulescentiae turpitudo obscuritate et sordibus tuis obtegatur. quaesturam petisti cum P. Sestio, cum hic nihil loqueretur nisi quod agebat, tu de altero consulatu gerendo te diceres cogitare.

[11] and I will allow that most tenebrous period of your commencing age to lie hidden. be it granted, with impunity for my part, that in your adolescence you bored through walls, you plundered your neighbors, you beat your mother: let your indignity have this as its premium, that the disgrace of your youth be covered over by your own obscurity and sordidness. you sought the quaestorship together with P. Sestius; while this man said nothing except what he was actually doing, you declared that you were thinking about the conducting of a second consulship.

quaero abs te teneasne memoria, cum P. Sestius quaestor sit cunctis suffragiis factus, tunc te vix, invitis omnibus, non populi beneficio sed consulis, extremum adhaesisse?

I ask you whether you keep in memory, when P. Sestius was made quaestor by all the suffrages, that then you, scarcely, with everyone unwilling, not by the people’s benefit but by the consul’s, were appended as the last?

[12] in eo magistratu cum tibi magno clamore aquaria provincia sorte obtigisset, missusne sis a me consule Puteolos, ut inde aurum exportari argentumque prohiberes? in eo negotio cum te non custodem ad continendas, sed portitorem ad partiendas mercis missum putares, cumque omnium domos, apothecas, navis furacissime scrutarere, hominesque negoti gerentis iudiciis iniquissimis inretires, mercatores e navi egredientis terreres, conscendentis morarere, teneasne memoria tibi in conventu Puteolis manus esse adlatas, ad me consulem querelas Puteolanorum esse delatas? post quaesturam exierisne legatus in ulteriorem Hispaniam C. Cosconio pro consule?

[12] in that magistracy, when by great clamor the water-supply province had by lot fallen to you, were you sent by me, as consul, to Puteoli, that from there you might prohibit gold and silver from being exported? in that business, since you thought you had been sent not as a custodian to restrain the wares, but as a toll-collector to apportion them, and since you most thievishly rummaged through everyone’s houses, apothecae (storehouses), and ships, and ensnared men conducting business by most unjust judgments, you frightened merchants disembarking from a ship, you delayed those boarding, do you hold in memory that in the assembly at Puteoli hands were laid upon you, that complaints of the Puteolans were conveyed to me as consul? after the quaestorship did you go out as legate into Further Spain to Gaius Cosconius, proconsul?

cum illud iter Hispaniense pedibus fere confici soleat, aut, si qui navigare velit, certa sit ratio navigandi, venerisne in Sardiniam atque inde in Africam? fuerisne, quod sine senatus consulto tibi facere non licuit, in regno Hiempsalis, fuerisne in regno Mastanesosi, venerisne ad fretum per Mauretaniam? quem scias umquam legatum Hispaniensem istis itineribus in illam provinciam pervenisse?

since that Hispania-bound journey is generally accomplished on foot, or, if anyone should wish to sail, there is a fixed method of sailing, did you come into Sardinia and thence into Africa? were you—what you were not permitted to do without a decree of the senate—in the kingdom of Hiempsal, were you in the kingdom of Mastanesosus, did you come to the strait through Mauretania? what Hispaniensis legate do you know ever to have reached that province by such routes?

[13] factus es tribunus plebis—quid enim te de Hispaniensibus flagitiis tuis sordidissimisque furtis interrogem? quaero abs te primum universe quod genus improbitatis et sceleris in eo magistratu praetermiseris? ac tibi iam inde praescribo ne tuas sordis cum clarissimorum virorum splendore permisceas. ego te quaecumque rogabo de te ipso rogabo, neque te ex amplissimi viri dignitate, sed ex tuis tenebris extraham; omniaque mea tela sic in te conicientur ut nemo per tuum latus, quod soles dicere, saucietur; in tuis pulmonibus ac visceribus haerebunt

[13] you were made tribune of the plebs—why, indeed, should I question you about your Spanish disgraces and most sordid thefts? I ask of you first, in general, what kind of depravity and crime did you omit in that magistracy? And I now prescribe to you from this point not to commingle your filth with the splendor of most illustrious men. Whatever I shall ask you, I shall ask about you yourself, and I will not draw you out on the dignity of a most distinguished man, but out of your own darkness; and all my missiles will thus be hurled at you, that no one will be wounded through your flank, as you are wont to say; they will stick in your lungs and your viscera.

[VI]

[6]

[14] et quoniam omnium rerum magnarum ab dis immortalibus principia ducuntur, volo ut mihi respondeas tu, qui te Pythagoreum soles dicere et hominis doctissimi nomen tuis immanibus et barbaris moribus praetendere, quae te tanta pravitas mentis tenuerit, qui tantus furor ut, cum inaudita ac nefaria sacra susceperis, cum inferorum animas elicere, cum puerorum extis deos manis mactare soleas, auspicia quibus haec urbs condita est, quibus omnis res publica atque imperium tenetur, contempseris, initioque tribunatus tui senatui denuntiaris tuis actionibus augurum responsa atque eius conlegi adrogantiam impedimento non futura?

[14] and since the beginnings of all great things are drawn from the immortal gods, I want you to answer me—you, who are wont to call yourself a Pythagorean and to put forward the name of a most learned man as a pretext for your enormous and barbarous morals—what such perversity of mind held you, what such frenzy, that, when you had undertaken unheard-of and nefarious rites, when you are accustomed to draw forth the souls of those below, to sacrifice the Manes, the gods of the dead, with the entrails of boys, you despised the auspices by which this city was founded, by which the whole republic and imperium is held; and at the beginning of your tribunate you gave notice to the senate that in your proceedings the responses of the augurs and the arrogance of that college would not be an impediment?

[15] Secundum ea quaero servarisne in eo fidem? num quando tibi moram attulerit quo minus concilium advocares legemque ferres, quod eo die scires de caelo esse servatum? et quoniam hic locus est unus quem tibi cum Caesare communem esse dicas, seiungam te ab illo, non solum rei publicae causa verum etiam Caesaris, ne qua ex tua summa indignitate labes illius dignitati adspersa videatur.

[15] In accordance with this I ask: have you kept faith in this? Has it ever brought you a delay so that you did not convene the assembly and bring forward a law, because you knew that on that day the auspices had been observed from the sky? And since this is the one point which you say you have in common with Caesar, I will separate you from him, not only for the sake of the Republic but also of Caesar, lest any stain from your utmost indignity seem to have been spattered upon his dignity.

primum quaero num tu senatui causam tuam permittas, quod facit Caesar? deinde, quae sit auctoritas eius qui se alterius facto, non suo defendat? deinde,— erumpet enim aliquando ex me vera vox et dicam sine cunctatione quod sentio,—si iam violentior aliqua in re C. Caesar fuisset, si eum magnitudo contentionis, studium gloriae, praestans animus, excellens nobilitas aliquo impulisset, quod in illo viro et tum ferendum esset et maximis rebus quas postea gessit oblitterandum, id tu tibi, furcifer, sumes, et Vatini latronis ac sacrilegi vox audietur hoc postulantis, ut idem sibi concedatur quod Caesari?

first I ask whether you entrust your case to the senate, as Caesar does? then, what authority has he who defends himself by another’s deed, not his own? then,—for a true voice will burst out of me at some point and I will say without hesitation what I think,—if at some time in some matter Gaius Caesar had been rather more violent, if the magnitude of the contention, the zeal for glory, his outstanding spirit, his excellent nobility had impelled him to something, which in that man both then ought to be endured and to be obliterated by the very great deeds which he afterwards accomplished, will you, you gallows-bird, take that for yourself, and will the voice of Vatinius, a robber and a sacrilegious man, be heard demanding this, that the same be conceded to himself as to Caesar?

[VII]

[7]

[16] sic enim ex te quaero. tribunus plebis fuisti,—seiunge te a consule: conlegas habuisti viros fortis novem. ex iis tres erant quos tu cotidie sciebas servare de caelo, quos inridebas, quos privatos esse dicebas; de quibus duos praetextatos sedentis vides,—te aediliciam praetextam togam, quam frustra confeceras, vendidisse!—tertium scis ex illo obsesso atque adflicto tribunatu consularem auctoritatem hominem esse adulescentem consecutum.

[16] for thus I ask of you. You were tribune of the plebs,—separate yourself from the consul: you had colleagues, nine brave men. Of these there were three whom you knew every day to observe from the sky (i.e., to take auspices), whom you mocked, whom you said were private persons; of whom you see two sitting in the toga praetexta,—you, the aedilician toga praetexta, which you had prepared in vain, have sold!—the third you know, from that tribunate besieged and afflicted, a young man, to have attained consular authority.

reliqui sex fuerunt, e quibus partim plane tecum sentiebant, partim medium quendam cursum tenebant: omnes habuerunt leges promulgatas, in iis multas meus necessarius, etiam de mea sententia, C. Cosconius, iudex noster, quem tu dirumperis cum aedilicium vides.

The remaining six there were, of whom some were plainly of your mind, others held a certain middle course: all had laws promulgated, among them many by my close associate—indeed even on my advice—C. Cosconius, our judge, at whom you burst with rage whenever you behold the aedileship.

[17] volo uti mihi respondeas num quis ex toto conlegio legem sit ausus ferre praeter unum te? quae tanta in te fuerit audacia, quae tanta vis ut, quod novem tui conlegae sibi timendum esse duxerint, id unus tu emersus e caeno, omnium facile omnibus rebus infimus contemnendum, despiciendum, inridendum putares? num quem post urbem conditam scias tribunum plebis egisse cum plebe, cum constaret servatum esse de caelo.

[17] I wish you to answer me whether anyone out of the whole college dared to propose a law except you alone? What such great audacity was in you, what such force, that what nine of your colleagues judged was to be feared for themselves, that you—emerged out of the mud, easily the lowest of all in all matters—would think ought to be contemned, despised, and laughed at? Do you know of any tribune of the plebs, since the city was founded, who has transacted business with the plebs, when it was established that there had been observing from the sky?

[18] simul etiam illud volo uti respondeas, cum te tribuno plebis esset etiam tum in re publica lex Aelia et Fufia, quae leges saepe numero tribunicios furores debilitarunt et represserunt, quas contra praeter te nemo umquam est facere conatus,—quae quidem leges anno post, sedentibus in templo duobus non consulibus sed proditoribus huius civitatis ac pestibus, una cum auspiciis, cum intercessionibus, cum omni iure publico conflagraverunt: ecquando dubitaris contra eas leges cum plebe agere et concilium convocare? num quem ex omnibus tribunis plebis, quicumque seditiosi fuerunt, tam audacem audieris fuisse ut umquam contra legem Aeliam aut Fufiam concilium advocaret?

[18] at the same time I want you to answer this as well: when you were tribune of the plebs there still existed in the commonwealth the Lex Aelia and the Lex Fufia, which laws, again and again, debilitated and repressed tribunician furies—against which, besides you, no one ever attempted to act—laws which indeed, a year later, when there were sitting in the temple two not consuls but traitors and plagues of this city, went up in flames together with the auspices, with the intercessions, with all public right: did you ever hesitate to transact with the plebs against those laws and to convoke a council? have you ever heard any one of all the tribunes of the plebs, whatever firebrands they were, to have been so audacious as ever to convene a council contrary to the Lex Aelia or the Lex Fufia?

[VIII]

[8]

[19] quaero illud etiam ex te, conatusne sis, voluerisne, denique cogitaris,—est enim res eius modi ut, si tibi in mentem modo venit, nemo sit qui te ullo cruciatu esse indignum putet,—cogitarisne in illo tuo intolerabili non regno,—nam cupis id audire,—sed latrocinio augur fieri in Q. Metelli locum, ut, quicumque te aspexisset, duplicem dolorem gemitumque susciperet et ex desiderio clarissimi civis et ex honore turpissimi atque improbissimi? adeone non labefactatam rem publicam te tribuno neque conquassatam civitatem, sed captam hanc urbem atque perversam putaris ut augurem Vatinium ferre possemus?

[19] I ask this also of you, whether you tried, whether you wished, finally whether you even conceived the thought,—for it is a matter of such a sort that, if it merely came into your mind, there is no one who would deem you undeserving of any torture,—whether you conceived, in that your intolerable not-kingship,—for you are eager to hear that,—but brigandage, to become augur in the place of Q. Metellus, so that whoever looked upon you would take up a double pain and groan, both from the longing for a most illustrious citizen and from the honor paid to a most disgraceful and most reprobate one? Did you so think the commonwealth, under your tribunate, not shaken nor the state battered, but this city captured and perverted, that we could endure Vatinius as augur?

[20] hoc loco quaero, si, id quod concupieras, augur factus esses,—in qua tua cogitatione nos qui te oderamus vix dolorem ferebamus, illi autem quibus eras in deliciis vix risum tenebant: sed quaero, si ad cetera vulnera, quibus rem publicam putasti deleri, hanc quoque mortiferam plagam inflixisses auguratus tui, utrum decreturus fueris, id quod augures omnes usque ab Romulo decreverunt, Iove fulgente cum populo agi nefas esse, an, quia tu semper sic egisses, auspicia fueris augur dissoluturus?

[20] at this point I ask, if, that which you had coveted, you had been made augur,—at which thought we who hated you could scarcely endure our pain, while those by whom you were held in delights could scarcely restrain their laughter: but I ask, if to the other wounds by which you thought the commonwealth was being destroyed you had also inflicted this deadly blow of your augurship, whether you would have decreed that which all augurs ever since Romulus have decreed, that with Jupiter flashing it is nefas to conduct business with the people, or, because you had always acted thus, as augur you would have dissolved the auspices?

[IX]

[9]

[21] ac ne diutius loquar de auguratu tuo,—quod invitus facio ut recorder ruinas rei publicae; neque enim tu umquam stante non modo maiestate horum, sed etiam urbe te augurem fore putasti: verum tamen ut somnia tua relinquam, ad scelera veniam, volo uti mihi respondeas, cum M. Bibulum consulem non dicam bene de re publica sentientem, ne tu mihi homo potens irascare, qui ab eo dissensisti, sed hominem certe nusquam progredientem, nihil in re publica molientem, tantum animo ab actionibus tuis dissentientem,—cum eum tu consulem in vincula duceres et ab tabula Valeria conlegae tui mitti iuberent, fecerisne ante rostra pontem continuatis tribunalibus, per quem consul populi Romani moderatissimus et constantissimus, sublato auxilio, exclusis amicis, vi perditorum hominum incitata, turpissimo miserrimoque spectaculo non in carcerem, sed ad supplicium et ad necem duceretur?

[21] And lest I speak longer about your augurate—which I do unwillingly, as I recall the ruins of the commonwealth; for you never supposed that you would be an augur while there stood not only the majesty of these men, but even the city: yet, however, so that I may leave your dreams aside, I will come to crimes—I wish you to answer me this: when M. Bibulus, the consul—I will not say “thinking well concerning the commonwealth,” lest you, a powerful man, be angry with me, who dissented from him—but certainly a man advancing nowhere, attempting nothing in the commonwealth, only in spirit dissenting from your actions—when you were leading that consul in chains, and orders were being given, from the Valerian tablet of your colleague, that he be released, did you make in front of the rostra a bridge by the tribunals connected together, over which the most moderate and most steadfast consul of the Roman people, with aid removed, his friends shut out, the violence of profligate men incited, with a most disgraceful and most pitiable spectacle, was being led not into the prison, but to punishment and to death?

[22] quaero num quis ante te tam fuerit nefarius qui id fecerit, ut sciamus utrum veterum facinorum sis imitator an inventor novorum; idemque tu cum his atque huius modi consiliis ac facinoribus nomine C. Caesaris, clementissimi atque optimi viri, scelere vero atque audacia tua, M. Bibulum foro, curia, templis, locis publicis omnibus expulisses, inclusum domi contineres, cumque non maiestate imperi, non iure legum, sed ianuae praesidio et parietum custodiis consulis vita tegeretur, miserisne viatorem qui M. Bibulum domo vi extraheret, ut, quod in privatis semper est servatum, id te tribuno plebis consuli domus exsilium esse non posset?

[22] I ask whether anyone before you has ever been so nefarious as to have done that, so that we may know whether you are an imitator of ancient crimes or an inventor of new ones; and you, with these counsels and crimes of this sort in the name of Gaius Caesar, a most clement and best man—yet in truth by your own crime and audacity—had expelled Marcus Bibulus from the forum, the Curia, the temples, all the public places, kept him shut up at home, and, since the life of a consul was being covered not by the majesty of imperium nor by the right of the laws, but by the guard of the doorway and the custody of the walls, did you send an usher to drag Marcus Bibulus by force out of his house, so that what has always been observed in the case of private persons—that the house is an asylum—could not, as against you, a tribune of the plebs, be an asylum for a consul?

[23] simulque mihi respondeto tu, qui nos qui de communi salute consentimus tyrannos vocas, fuerisne non tribunus plebis, sed intolerandus ex caeno nescio qui atque ex tenebris tyrannus, qui primum eam rem publicam quae auspiciis inventis constituta est isdem auspiciis sublatis conarere pervertere, deinde sanctissimas leges, Aeliam et Fufiam dico, quae in Gracchorum ferocitate et in audacia Saturnini et in conluvione Drusi et in contentione Sulpici et in cruore Cinnano, etiam inter Sullana arma vixerunt, solus conculcaris ac pro nihilo putaris, qui consulem morti obieceris, inclusum obsederis, extrahere ex suis tectis conatus sis, qui in eo magistratu non (modo) emerseris ex mendicitate, sed etiam divitiis nos iam tuis terreas?

[23] and at the same time answer me this: you, who call us—who are of one mind about the common safety—tyrants, were you not yourself, not a tribune of the plebs, but an intolerable tyrant, I know not what sort, out of the mire and out of the darkness—who first tried to overturn that commonwealth which was established upon the discovery of the auspices, by removing those same auspices; and then you alone trampled underfoot and reckoned as nothing the most sacred laws, I mean the Aelian and the Fufian, which lived on through the ferocity of the Gracchi and the audacity of Saturninus and the offscouring of Drusus and the contention of Sulpicius and the Cinnan blood, even amid the Sullan arms; you who have exposed the consul to death, besieged him while shut in, tried to drag him from his own roof; you who in that magistracy have not (merely) emerged from beggary, but now even with your riches strike fear into us?

[X]

[10]

[24] fuerisne tanta crudelitate ut delectos viros et principes civitatis tollere et delere tua rogatione conareris, cum L. Vettium, qui in senatu confessus esset se cum telo fuisse, mortem Cn. Pompeio, summo et clarissimo civi, suis manibus offerre voluisse, in contionem produxeris, indicem in rostris, in illo, inquam, augurato templo ac loco conlocaris, quo auctoritatis exquirendae causa ceteri tribuni plebis principes civitatis producere consuerunt? ibi tu indicem Vettium linguam et vocem suam sceleri et dementiae tuae praebere voluisti. dixeritne L. Vettius in contione tua rogatus a te sese auctores et impulsores et socios habuisse sceleris illius eos viros, quibus e civitate sublatis, quod tu eo tempore moliebare, civitas stare non posset?

[24] have you been of such cruelty that you tried by your rogation to take away and to annihilate chosen men and the chiefs of the state, when you brought into a public assembly L. Vettius, who had confessed in the senate that he had been with a weapon, that he had wished to offer death to Cn. Pompey, the highest and most illustrious citizen, with his own hands, you set the informer on the Rostra, in that, I say, augural temple and place, where, for the sake of seeking authority, the other tribunes of the plebs were accustomed to bring forward the chiefs of the state? There you wished the informer Vettius to lend his tongue and his voice to your crime and your madness. Did L. Vettius in your assembly, asked by you, say that he had had as authors and instigators and associates of that crime those men, with whom, once removed from the state—which was what you were then contriving—the state could not stand?

M. Bibulum, cuius inclusione contentus non eras, interficere volueras, spoliaras consulatu, patria privare cupiebas; L. Lucullum, cuius tu rebus gestis, quod ipse ad imperatorias laudes a puero videlicet spectaras, vehementius invidebas, C. Curionem, perpetuum hostem improborum omnium, auctorem publici consili in libertate communi tuenda maxime liberum, cum filio principe iuventutis cum re publica coniunctiore etiam quam ab illa aetate postulandum fuit, delere voluisti; L.

M. Bibulus, with whose confinement you were not content, you had wished to kill, you had despoiled of the consulship, you were eager to deprive of his fatherland; L. Lucullus, whose deeds you envied the more vehemently, because you yourself had evidently aimed from boyhood at imperatorial praises; C. Curio, the perpetual enemy of all the wicked, the proposer of public counsel in safeguarding the common liberty, a man most free, together with his son, prince of the youth, more closely joined to the republic even than was to be demanded from that age, you wanted to destroy; L.

[25] Domitium, cuius dignitas et splendor praestringebat, credo, oculos Vatini,—quem tu propter commune odium in bonos oderas, in posterum autem, propter omnium spem quae de illo est atque erat, ante aliquanto timebas, L. Lentulum, hunc iudicem nostrum, flaminem Martialem, quod erat eo tempore Gabini tui competitor, eiusdem Vetti indicio opprimere voluisti: qui si tum illam labem pestemque vicisset, quod ei tuo scelere non licuit, res publica victa non esset. huius etiam filium eodem indicio et crimine ad patris interitum adgregare voluisti: L. Paulum, qui tum quaestor Macedoniam obtinebat, quem civem, quem virum! qui duo nefarios patriae proditores, domesticos hostis, legibus exterminarat, hominem ad conservandam rem publicam natum, in idem Vetti indicium atque in eundem hunc numerum congregasti.

[25] Domitius, whose dignity and splendor, I believe, bedazzled the eyes of Vatinius,—whom you hated on account of the common hatred against good men, and for the future, on account of the universal hope which is and was felt concerning him, you feared somewhat beforehand,—L. Lentulus, this judge of ours, Flamen of Mars, because at that time he was a competitor of your Gabinius, you wished to crush by the same testimony of Vettius: who, if then he had conquered that stain and pest, which by your wickedness it was not permitted him to do, the commonwealth would not have been vanquished. You even wished to add this man’s son, by the same testimony and charge, to his father’s destruction: L. Paulus, who then, as quaestor, held Macedonia—what a citizen, what a man!—who had by laws exterminated two nefarious betrayers of the fatherland, domestic enemies, a man born for the preservation of the commonwealth, you gathered into the same Vettius’s testimony and into this same roll.

[26] quid ergo de me querar? qui etiam gratias tibi agere debeo quod me ex fortissimorum civium numero seiungendum non putasti.

[26] What, then, should I complain about concerning myself? I, who even ought to give thanks to you, because you did not think that I should be separated from the number of the bravest citizens.

[XI] sed qui fuit tuus ille tantus furor ut, cum iam Vettius ad arbitrium tuum perorasset et civitatis lumina notasset descendissetque de rostris, eum repente revocares, conloquerere populo Romano vidente, deinde interrogares ecquosnam alios posset nominare? inculcarisne ut C. Pisonem, generum meum, nominaret, qui in summa copia optimorum adulescentium pari continentia, virtute, pietate reliquit neminem, itemque M. Laterensem, hominem dies atque noctes de laude et de re publica cogitantem? promulgarisne, impurissime hostis, quaestionem de tot amplissimis et talibus viris, indicium Vettio, praemia amplissima?

[11] but what was that so great fury of yours that, when now Vettius had perorated at your pleasure and had marked the luminaries of the state and had descended from the Rostra, you suddenly recalled him, held a colloquy with him as the Roman people looked on, then asked whether he could name any others? did you press it in, that he should name C. Piso, my son-in-law, who, amid the greatest abundance of the best young men, has left no one his equal in continence, virtue, and piety, and likewise M. Laterensis, a man thinking day and night about praise and about the commonwealth? did you promulgate, most impure enemy, a quaestion (commission of inquiry) concerning so many and such most distinguished men, with Vettius as informer, with most ample rewards?

quibus rebus omnium mortalium non voluntate sed convicio repudiatis, fregerisne in carcere cervices ipsi illi Vettio, ne quod indicium corrupti indici exstaret eiusque sceleris in te ipsum quaestio flagitaretur?

with these things repudiated by all mortals, not by their will but with an outcry, did you break in prison the neck of that very Vettius himself, lest any evidence of a corrupt informer should stand forth and an inquiry into that crime be demanded against you yourself?

[27] et quoniam crebro usurpas legem te de alternis consiliis reiciendis tulisse, ut omnes intellegant te ne recte quidem facere sine scelere potuisse, quaero, cum lex esset aequa promulgata initio magistratus, multas iam alias tulisses, exspectarisne dum C. Antonius reus fieret apud Cn. Lentulum Clodianum, et, postea quam ille est reus factus, statim tuleris in eum 'qui tuam post legem reus factus esset,' ut homo consularis exclusus miser puncto temporis spoliaretur beneficio et aequitate legis tuae?

[27] and since you frequently claim that you carried a law on the alternate rejection of jury panels, so that everyone may understand that you could not even do what was right without crime, I ask: although the law, fair, had been promulgated at the beginning of your magistracy, and you had already proposed many others, did you wait until Gaius Antonius became a defendant before Gnaeus Lentulus Clodianus, and, after he had become a defendant, did you immediately propose against “him who had become a defendant after your law,” so that a consular man, excluded, poor wretch, by a mere point of time, was despoiled of the benefit and equity of your law?

[28] dices familiaritatem tibi fuisse cum Q. Maximo. praeclara defensio facinoris tui! nam maximi quidem summa laus est sumptis inimicitiis, suscepta causa, quaesitore consilioque delecto, commodiorem inimico suo condicionem reiectionis dare noluisse.

[28] you will say that you had familiarity with Q. Maximus. splendid defense of your crime! for indeed the highest praise of Maximus is that, enmities having been assumed, the cause undertaken, with the quaesitor and the council selected, he was unwilling to grant his enemy a more advantageous condition of rejection.

nihil maximus fecit alienum aut sua virtute aut illis viris clarissimis, Paulis, maximis, Africanis, quorum gloriam huius virtute renovatam non modo speramus, verum etiam iam videmus; tua fraus, tuum maleficium, tuum scelus illud est, te id quod promulgasses misericordiae nomine ad crudelitatis tempus distulisse. ac nunc quidem C. Antonius hac una re miseriam suam consolatur, quod imagines patris et fratris sui fratrisque filiam non in familia sed in carcere conlocatam audire maluit quam videre.

Maximus did nothing alien either to his own virtue or to those most illustrious men, the Pauli, the Maximi, the Africanis, whose glory, renewed by this man’s virtue, we not only hope for, but even now already see; it is your fraud, your malefaction, your crime, that what you had promulgated under the name of mercy you deferred to a time of cruelty. And now indeed Gaius Antonius consoles his misery with this one thing: that he preferred to hear that the images of his father and brother, and his brother’s daughter, had been placed not in the household but in prison, rather than to see it.

[XII]

[12]

[29] et quoniam pecunias aliorum despicis, de tuis divitiis intolerantissime gloriaris, volo uti mihi respondeas, fecerisne foedera tribunus plebis cum civitatibus, cum regibus, cum tetrarchis; erogarisne pecunias ex aerario tuis legibus; eripuerisne partis illo tempore carissimas partim a Caesare, partim a publicanis? quae cum ita sint, quaero ex te sisne ex pauperrimo dives factus illo ipso anno quo lex lata est de pecuniis repetundis acerrima, ut omnes intellegere possent a te non modo nostra acta, quos tyrannos vocas, sed etiam amicissimi tui legem esse contemptam; apud quem tu etiam nos criminari soles, qui illi sumus amicissimi, cum tu ei contumeliosissime totiens male dicas quotiens te illi adfinem esse dicis.

[29] And since you look down on the monies of others, you most intolerably vaunt yourself on your own riches, I wish you to answer me whether you made treaties, as tribune of the plebs, with communities, with kings, with tetrarchs; whether you disbursed monies from the aerarium by your own laws; whether at that time you snatched away the dearest shares—partly from Caesar, partly from the publicani. Since these things are so, I ask you whether you were made rich from a most penniless state in that very year in which a most sharp law was passed on pecuniae repetundae, so that all might understand that by you not only our acts, whom you call tyrants, but even the law of your very dearest friend has been despised; in whose presence you are even wont to criminize us—who are his very closest friends—whereas you most contumeliously speak ill of him as often as you say that you are allied to him by marriage.

[30] atque etiam illud scire ex te cupio, quo consilio aut qua mente feceris ut in epulo Q. Arri, familiaris mei, cum toga pulla accumberes? quem umquam videris, quem audieris? quo exemplo, quo more feceris?

[30] And moreover I wish to know this from you: with what counsel or in what mind did you do it, that at the banquet of Q. Arri, my familiar, you reclined wearing a dark (mourning) toga? whom have you ever seen, whom have you heard? by what example, by what custom did you do it?

dices supplicationes te illas non probasse. optime: nullae fuerint supplicationes. videsne me nihil de anni illius causa, nihil de eo quod tibi commune cum summis viris esse videatur, sed de tuis propriis sceleribus ex te quaerere?

You will say that you did not approve those supplications. Excellent: let there have been no supplications. Do you see that I am asking you nothing about the cause of that year, nothing about that which seems to you to be common with the highest men, but from you about your own proper crimes?

nulla supplicatio fuerit. cedo quis umquam cenarit atratus? ita enim illud epulum est funebre ut munus sit funeris, epulae quidem ipsae dignitatis.

Let there have been no supplication. Come now, who has ever dined dressed in black? For that banquet is so funereal as to be a function of a funeral, while the feasts themselves are matters of dignity.

[XIII]

[13]

[31] sed omitto epulum populi Romani, festum diem argento, veste, omni apparatu ornatuque visendo: quis umquam in luctu domestico, quis in funere familiari cenavit cum toga pulla? cui de balineis exeunti praeter te toga pulla umquam data est? Cum tot hominum milia accumberent, cum ipse epuli dominus, Q. Arrius, albatus esset, tu in templum Castoris te cum C. Fibulo atrato ceterisque tuis furiis funestum intulisti.

[31] but I omit the banquet of the Roman people, the festival day for viewing silver, attire, every apparatus and ornament: who ever, in domestic mourning—who, at a familial funeral—dined wearing a black toga? to whom, on coming out from the baths, has a black toga ever been given, except to you? When so many thousands of men were reclining, when the very master of the banquet, Q. Arrius, was clad in white, you brought your ill-omened self into the Temple of Castor with C. Fibulus in mourning and your other furies.

quis tum non ingemuit, quis non doluit rei publicae casum? qui sermo alius in illo epulo fuit nisi hanc tantam et tam gravem civitatem subiectam esse non modo furori, verum etiam inrisioni tuae?

Who then did not groan, who did not grieve at the republic’s misfortune? What other talk was there at that banquet except that this so great and so grave a commonwealth had been subjected not only to your fury, but even to your derision?

[32] hunc tu morem ignorabas? numquam epulum videras? numquam puer aut adulescens inter cocos fueras?

[32] Were you ignorant of this custom? Had you never seen a banquet? Had you never, as a boy or an adolescent, been among the cooks?

Fausti, adulescentis nobilissimi, paulo ante ex epulo magnificentissimo famem illam veterem tuam non expleras? quem accumbere atratum videras? dominum cum toga pulla et eius amicos ante convivium?

Had you not, a little before, from the most magnificent banquet of Faustus, a most noble adolescent, filled that old hunger of yours? whom had you seen reclining clad in black? the master with a dark (mourning) toga and his friends, before the banquet?

quae tanta (te) tenuit amentia ut, nisi id fecisses quod fas non fuit, nisi violasses templum Castoris, nomen epuli, oculos civium, morem veterem, eius qui te invitarat auctoritatem, parum putares testificatum esse supplicationes te illas non putare?

what so great a madness held you, that, unless you had done what was not right (fas), unless you had violated the Temple of Castor, the name of the epulum, the eyes of the citizens, the ancient custom, the authority of him who had invited you, you would think it had been too little attested that you do not regard those supplications?

[XIV]

[14]

[33] quaero etiam illud ex te, quod privatus admisisti, in quo certe iam tibi dicere non licebit cum clarissimis viris causam tuam esse coniunctam, postulatusne sis lege Licinia et Iunia? edixeritne C. Memmius praetor ex ea lege ut adesses die tricensimo? cum is dies venisset, fecerisne quod in hac re publica non modo factum antea numquam est, sed in omni memoria est omnino inauditum?

[33] I also ask this of you, what you, as a private man, committed—in which matter surely now it will not be permitted for you to say that your cause is conjoined with the most illustrious men—were you summoned under the Licinian and Junian law? Did the praetor Gaius Memmius, by public edict from that law, order that you be present on the 30th day? When that day had come, did you do what in this commonwealth has not only never before been done, but is altogether unheard-of in all memory?

appellarisne tribunos plebis ne causam diceres—levius dixi; quamquam id ipsum esset et novum et non ferendum—sed appellarisne nominatim pestem illius anni, furiam patriae, tempestatem rei publicae, Clodium. qui tamen cum iure, cum more, cum potestate iudicium impedire non posset, rediit ad illam vim et furorem suum, ducemque se militibus tuis praebuit. in quo ne quid a me dictum in te potius putes quam abs te esse quaesitum, nullum onus imponam mihi testimoni: quae mihi brevi tempore ex eodem isto loco video esse dicenda servabo, teque non arguam, sed, ut in ceteris rebus feci, rogabo.

Did you appeal to the tribunes of the plebs that you might not plead your cause—I have spoken more lightly; although that very thing would be both novel and not to be borne—but did you appeal by name to the pest of that year, the fury of the fatherland, the tempest of the commonwealth, Clodius? Who yet, since he could not obstruct the judgment by right, by custom, by power, returned to that violence and his frenzy, and presented himself as leader to your soldiers. In this, lest you think anything has been said by me against you rather than asked from you, I will impose upon myself no burden of testimony: the things which I see must shortly be said by me from that very place I will reserve, and I will not accuse you, but, as I have done in the other matters, I will ask.

[34] quaero ex te, Vatini, num quis in hac civitate post urbem conditam tribunos plebis appellarit ne causam diceret? num quis reus in tribunal sui quaesitoris escenderit eumque vi deturbarit, subsellia dissiparit, urnas deiecerit, eas denique omnis res in iudicio disturbando commiserit, quarum rerum causa iudicia sunt constituta? sciasne tum fugisse Memmium, accusatores esse tuos de tuis tuorumque manibus ereptos, iudices quaestionum de proximis tribunalibus esse depulsos, in foro, luce, inspectante populo Romano quaestionem, magistratus, morem maiorum, leges, iudices, reum, poenam esse sublatam?

[34] I ask you, Vatinus, whether anyone in this state since the city was founded has appealed to the tribunes of the plebs in order not to plead his case? whether any defendant has mounted the tribunal of his own inquisitor and by force driven him off, scattered the benches, thrown down the urns, and finally committed, in throwing the trial into disorder, all those acts for the sake of which matters courts have been constituted? do you know that then Memmius fled, that your accusers were snatched from your hands and those of your men, that the jurors of the courts of inquiry were driven from the adjacent tribunals, that in the forum, in daylight, with the Roman people looking on, the court, the magistrates, the custom of the ancestors, the laws, the jurors, the defendant, the penalty were swept away?

haec omnia sciasne diligentia C. Memmi publicis tabulis esse notata atque testata? atque illud etiam quaero, cum, postea quam es postulatus, ex legatione redieris,—ne quis te iudicia defugere arbitretur,— teque, cum tibi utrum velles liceret, dictitaris causam dicere maluisse, qui consentaneum fuerit, cum legationis perfugio uti noluisses, appellatione improbissima te ad auxilium nefarium confugisse?

do you know that all these things, by the diligence of Gaius Memmius, have been noted and attested in the public records? and this too I ask: when, after you were called to trial, you returned from your legation,—lest anyone think you to be fleeing the courts,— and you, when it was permitted to you to choose either, keep saying that you preferred to plead your case, how is it consistent that, since you were unwilling to use the refuge of the legation, you fled by a most shameless appeal to nefarious aid?

[XV]

[15]

[35] et quoniam legationis tuae facta mentio est, volo audire de te quo tandem senatus consulto legatus sis. de gestu intellego quid respondeas: tua lege, dicis. esne igitur patriae certissimus parricida?

[35] and since mention has been made of your legation, I wish to hear from you by what, pray, senatorial decree you were appointed legate. From your gesture I understand what you answer: “by your law,” you say. Are you then the most certain parricide of the fatherland?

spectarasne id, ut patres conscripti ex re publica funditus tollerentur? ne hoc quidem senatui relinquebas, quod nemo umquam ademit, ut legati ex eius ordinis auctoritate legarentur? adeone tibi sordidum consilium publicum visum est, adeo adflictus senatus, adeo misera et prostrata res publica ut non nuntios pacis ac belli, non oratores, non interpretes, non bellici consili auctores, non ministros muneris provincialis senatus more maiorum deligere posset?

Had you had in view this—that the enrolled fathers be uprooted from the commonwealth root and branch? Were you not leaving even this to the senate, which no one has ever taken away: that envoys be commissioned by the authority of that order? Did public counsel seem so sordid to you, was the senate so afflicted, was the commonwealth so wretched and prostrate, that it could not, by the senate’s ancestral custom, choose messengers of peace and war, nor orators, nor interpreters, nor advisers in war-counsel, nor ministers of the provincial office?

[36] eripueras senatui provinciae decernendae potestatem, imperatoris deligendi iudicium, aerari dispensationem: quae numquam sibi populus Romanus appetivit, qui numquam senatui summi consili gubernationem auferre conatus est. age, factum est horum aliquid in aliis: raro, sed tamen factum est ut populus deligeret imperatorem: quis legatos umquam audivit sine senatus consulto? ante te nemo, post continuo fecit idem in duobus prodigiis rei publicae Clodius; quo etiam maiore es malo mactandus, quod non solum facto tuo sed etiam exemplo rem publicam vulnerasti, neque tantum ipse es improbus sed etiam alios docere voluisti.

[36] you had snatched from the senate the power of decreeing a province, the judgment of selecting a commander, the dispensation of the treasury: which the Roman people never coveted for themselves, who never attempted to take from the senate the governance of the highest counsel. Come now, something of these has been done by others: rarely, but still it has happened that the people chose a commander; who has ever heard of legates without a decree of the senate? before you, no one; afterward, straightway Clodius did the same in two prodigies of the republic; for which you must be punished with so much the greater evil, because you have wounded the republic not only by your deed but also by your example, and you are not only wicked yourself but also wished to teach others.

ob hasce omnis res sciasne te severissimorum hominum Sabinorum, fortissimorum virorum Marsorum et Paelignorum, tribulium tuorum, iudicio notatum, nec post Romam conditam praeter te tribulem quemquam tribum Sergiam perdidisse?

on account of all these things, do you know that you have been marked by the judgment of the most severe men, the Sabines, of the bravest men, the Marsi and the Paeligni, your fellow-tribesmen, and that, since Rome was founded, no fellow-tribesman except you has lost the Sergian tribe?

[37] atque illud etiam audire (de) te cupio, qua re, cum ego legem de ambitu tulerim ex senatus consulto, tulerim sine vi, tulerim salvis auspiciis, tulerim salva lege Aelia et Fufia, tu eam esse legem non putes, praesertim cum ego legibus tuis, quoquo modo latae sunt, paream; cum mea lex dilucide vetet biennio qvo qvis petat petitvrvsve sit gladiatores dare nisi ex testamento praestitvta die, quae tanta in te sit amentia ut in ipsa petitione gladiatores audeas dare? num quem putes illius tui certissimi gladiatoris similem tribunum plebis posse reperiri qui se interponat quo minus reus mea lege fias?

[37] And this too I desire to hear from you, for what reason, since I brought in a law on ambitus (electoral bribery) in accordance with a senatorial decree, I brought it without force, I brought it with the auspices intact, I brought it with the Law Aelia and the Law Fufia intact, you think that it is not a law—especially since I obey your laws, however they were carried; whereas my law clearly forbids that within the two years during which anyone is a candidate or is about to be a candidate he give gladiators, unless on a day appointed by a will—what madness so great is in you that you dare to give gladiators in the very canvassing? Do you think that any tribune of the plebs can be found like that surest gladiator of yours, who would interpose himself to prevent your becoming a defendant under my law?

[XVI]

[16]

[38] ac si haec omnia contemnis ac despicis, quod ita tibi persuaseris, ut palam dictitas, te dis hominibusque invitis amore in te incredibili quodam C. Caesaris omnia quae velis consecuturum, ecquid audieris, ecquisnam tibi dixerit C. Caesarem nuper Aquileiae, cum de quibusdam esset mentio facta, dixisse C. Alfium praeteritum permoleste tulisse, quod in homine summam fidem probitatemque cognosset, graviterque etiam se ferre praetorem aliquem esse factum qui a suis rationibus dissensisset; tum quaesisse quendam, de Vatinio quem ad modum ferret; illum respondisse Vatinium in tribunatu gratis nihil fecisse; qui omnia in pecunia posuisset honore animo aequo carere debere.

[38] And if you contemn and despise all these things, because you have so persuaded yourself that you keep saying openly that, with gods and men unwilling, by a certain unbelievable love of Gaius Caesar toward you you will obtain all that you wish, have you heard at all—has anyone told you—that Gaius Caesar recently at Aquileia, when mention had been made of certain persons, said that he took it very badly that Gaius Alfius had been passed over, because he had recognized in the man the highest fidelity and probity, and that he also was taking it grievously that someone had been made praetor who had dissented from his interests; then someone asked how he felt about Vatinius; he replied that Vatinius in his tribunate had done nothing gratis; that one who had placed everything on money ought to be without honor with an even mind.

[39] quod si ipse, qui te suae dignitatis augendae causa, periculo tuo, nullo suo delicto, ferri praecipitem est facile passus, tamen te omni honore indignissimum iudicat, si te vicini, si adfines, si tribules ita oderunt ut repulsam tuam triumphum suum duxerint, si nemo aspicit quin ingemescat, nemo mentionem facit quin exsecretur, si vitant, fugiunt, audire de te nolunt, cum viderunt, tamquam auspicium malum detestantur, si cognati respuunt, tribules exsecrantur, vicini metuunt, adfines erubescunt, strumae denique ab ore improbo demigrarunt et aliis iam se locis conlocarunt, si es odium publicum populi, senatus, universorum hominum rusticanorum,—quid est quam ob rem praeturam potius exoptes quam mortem, praesertim cum popularem te velis esse neque ulla re populo gratius facere possis?

[39] But if he himself, who for the sake of augmenting his own dignity, at your peril, with no fault of his own, has readily allowed you to be borne headlong, nevertheless judges you most unworthy of every honor; if your neighbors, if your connections by marriage, if your fellow-tribesmen so hate you that they have reckoned your rejection their own triumph; if no one looks at you without groaning, no one makes mention without execrating; if they shun you, flee you, are unwilling to hear about you, when they have seen you, they detest you as an evil omen; if your kinsmen spit you out, your fellow-tribesmen execrate you, your neighbors fear you, your in-laws blush; if at last the scrofulous swellings have migrated from your shameless mouth and have now planted themselves in other places; if you are the public hatred of the people, of the Senate, of all countrymen,—what is there for which you would desire the praetorship rather than death, especially since you wish to be a man of the people and you could do nothing more pleasing to the people?

[40] sed ut aliquando audiamus quam copiose mihi ad rogata respondeas, concludam iam interrogationem meam teque in extremo pauca de ipsa causa rogabo.

[40] But so that at last we may hear how copiously you respond to the things asked of you, I will now conclude my interrogation, and at the end I will ask you a few points about the case itself.

[XVII] quaero quae tanta in te vanitas, tanta levitas fuerit ut in hoc iudicio T. Annium isdem verbis laudares quibus eum verbis laudare et boni viri et boni cives consuerunt, cum in eundem nuper ab eadem illa taeterrima furia productus ad populum cupidissime falsum testimonium dixeris? an erit haec optio et potestas tua, ut, cum Clodianas operas et facinerosorum hominum et perditorum manum videris, Milonem dicas, id quod in contione dixisti, gladiatoribus et bestiariis obsedisse rem publicam: cum autem ad talis viros veneris, non audeas civem singulari virtute, fide, constantia vituperare?

[17] I ask, what such great vanity, such great levity was in you that in this judgment you would laud T. Annius with the same words with which both good men and good citizens have been accustomed to laud him, when against this same man, having been produced before the people recently by that same most loathsome Fury, you most eagerly gave false testimony? Or shall this be your option and power, that, when you have seen the Clodian operatives and the band of criminal and profligate men, you say—what you said in the public assembly—that Milo has besieged the Republic with gladiators and beast-fighters; but when you have come before men of such a sort, you do not dare to vituperate a citizen of singular virtue, good faith, and constancy?

[41] sed cum T. Annium tanto opere laudes et clarissimo viro non nullam laudatione tua labeculam adspergas—in illorum enim numero mavult T. Annius esse qui a te vituperantur: verum tamen quaero, cum in re publica administranda T. Annio cum P. Sestio consiliorum omnium societas fuerit —id quod non solum bonorum, verum etiam improborum iudicio declaratum est; est enim reus uterque ob eandem causam et eodem crimine, alter die dicta ab eo quem tu unum improbiorem esse quam te (non) numquam soles confiteri, alter tuis consiliis, illo tamen adiuvante—quaero qui possis eos quos crimine coniungis testimonio diiungere? extremum illud est quod mihi abs te responderi velim, cum multa in Albinovanum de praevaricatione diceres, dixerisne nec tibi placuisse nec oportuisse Sestium de vi reum fieri? quavis lege, quovis crimine accusandum potius fuisse?

[41] but when you so greatly praise T. Annius and, by your panegyric, besprinkle a most illustrious man with some little smirch—for T. Annius prefers to be in the number of those who are vituperated by you: nevertheless I ask, since in administering the republic T. Annius had a partnership of all counsels with P. Sestius—which has been declared by the judgment not only of the good, but even of the wicked; for each is a defendant on the same cause and the same charge, the one with the day named by that man whom you are sometimes wont to confess to be the only person more wicked than yourself, the other through your counsels, with that man, however, assisting—I ask how you can separate by testimony those whom you conjoin by the charge? that final point is what I would like to be answered by you, when you were saying many things against Albinovanus about prevarication, whether you said that it neither pleased you nor was it proper that Sestius be made a defendant on a charge of violence? that he ought rather to be accused under any law, on any crime?

etiam illud dixeris, causam Milonis, fortissimi viri, coniunctam cum hoc existimari? quae pro me a Sestio facta sint, bonis esse grata? non coarguo inconstantiam orationis ac testimoni tui—quas enim huius actiones probatas bonis esse dicis, in eas plurimis verbis testimonium dixisti; quicum autem eius causam periculumque coniungis, eum summis laudibus extulisti: sed hoc quaero, num P. Sestium, qua lege accusandum omnino fuisse negas, ea lege condemnari putes oportere?

Did you also say this, that the cause of Milo, a most brave man, is reckoned as conjoined with this man? that the things done on my behalf by Sestius are pleasing to good men? I do not arraign the inconsistency of your speech and your testimony—for those actions of this man which you say have been approved by good men, upon those you gave testimony in very many words; and the man with whom you conjoin his cause and peril, him you have exalted with highest praises: but this I ask, whether you think that P. Sestius, whom you deny altogether ought to have been accused under that law, ought to be condemned by that law?

aut, si te in testimonio consuli noles, ne quid tibi auctoritatis a me tributum esse videatur, dixerisne in eum testimonium de vi quem negaris reum omnino de vi fieri debuisse?

or, if you are unwilling to be consulted in your testimony, lest any authority seem to have been attributed to you by me, did you give testimony on the charge of violence against him whom you deny ought at all to have been made a defendant on a charge of violence?