, and make a clean beginning after Actium or in 27 B.C. is an offence against the nature of history and is the prime cause of m

ture. Heaven and the verdict of history conspire to load the scales against the vanquished. Brutus and Cassius lie damned to

he estimate of his political activity when he raised up Caesar’s heir against Antonius. The last year of Cicero’s life, full of

estored oligarchy of the nobiles held office at Rome. Pompeius fought against it; but Pompeius, for all his power, had to come

tween class and class. Naked power prevailed. 4 The anger of Heaven against the Roman People was revealed in signal and conti

t, jealous to guard his dignitas, that is, rank, prestige and honour, against the attacks of his personal enemies. 2 The plea o

acks of his personal enemies. 2 The plea of security and self-defence against aggression was often invoked by a politician when

er, the ornament and bulwark of the Roman State. 2 Cicero never spoke against these ‘homines honestissimi’ and never let them d

irst in his consulate as concordia ordinum between Senate and knights against the improbi, but later widened to a consensus omn

them on the side of the dominant oligarchy. He failed, and they rose against Rome in the name of freedom and justice. On the B

reduced. But Etruria, despoiled and resentful, rose again for Lepidus against the Roman oligarchy. 1 Lepidus was suppressed.

he provinces and on the frontiers of its wide and cumbersome dominion against Sertorius and the last survivors of the Marian fa

inst Sertorius and the last survivors of the Marian faction in Spain, against the great Mithridates and against the Pirates. La

ors of the Marian faction in Spain, against the great Mithridates and against the Pirates. Lack of capacity among the principal

ies had earned or confirmed their title of nobility by command in war against the Samnites and the Carthaginians: some had main

eached the consulate. 5 Philippus steeled the Senate to take action against Lepidus (Sallust, Hist. I, 77 M); and he secured

upid. 1 Their heraldic badge was an elephant, commemorating a victory against the Carthaginians. 2 The Metelli prevailed by the

d vocantur illi optimates. ’ 3 For example, in defence of Verres or against the bills of Gabinius and Manilius. There was a f

iracundia’, Caesar, BC 3, 16, 3. 4 P. Clodius was an ally of Cicero against Catilina. The Claudii were presumably trying to c

mies. But this patrician demagogue lacked fear or scruple. Contending against two of the principes, he won through bribery and

h Sulla. The implacable Cato detested the financiers. He stood firm against Italians, hating them from his very infancy; 3 an

more was involved than the privileges of an oligarchy: in the contest against Cn. Pompeius Magnus, Cato and his kinsmen Notes

peace, through illegality and treachery. He held a command in Africa against Marian remnants and triumphed, though not a senat

e after six years of absence, when he had terminated the war in Spain against Sertorius, Pompeius combined with another army co

tribune’s law the People conferred upon their champion a vast command against the Pirates, with proconsular authority over the

and claim the support of Pompeius even though the one of them turned against the People when elected consul and the other lent

dy to his allies and tireless in the law-courts, he might yet prevail against the popularity and laurels of Pompeius. When th

m. pet. 5, cf. 51. Compare also Cicero’s whole argument in the speech against the land bill of Rullus. 3 Both actions and mot

ier L. Afranius commanded armies for Pompeius in Spain and in the war against Mithridates. 5 Among other Picene partisans may b

on goats (ib. 2, 3, 1), who had been a legate of Pompeius in the war against the Pirates (ib. 2, praef. 6). Another member of

our of his family. 6 Everything went wrong. The consul Celer turned against Pompeius, and Afranius was a catastrophe, his onl

, 3. 8 Dio 37, 49, 4 ff. (Metellus Creticus (cos. 69) bore a grudge against Pompeius as the result of an earlier clash, in 67

bitter feud by giving testimony, under secret and domestic pressure, against P. Clodius; 2 and he had prevented the Pompeian c

o’s, and the greater delusion. The leader of the Optimates had fought against the consuls and tribunes of Pompeius Magnus, mock

s not yet ready to drop his ally. He needed Caesar for counterbalance against the Catonian party until he made final choice bet

hints of going to Spain, but forced by the Optimates, not altogether against his will, to demand a legion from Caesar. The pre

mmonwealth. Curio became a popular hero, and the People was incited against the Senate. The threat of a coalition between Pom

e, or Caesar’s victory and the rewards of greed and ambition in a war against the Sullan oligarchy. Italy began to stir. In t

consular Ahenobarbus, had suffered defeat in contest for an augurship against M. Antonius, sent from Gaul by Caesar. 3 That eve

posal came up in the Senate again, revealing an overpowering majority against both dynasts. 2 The consul C. Marcellus denounced

oyal support of Cato, Ahenobarbus and Brutus joined a sacred vendetta against Pompeius. For Cato or for the Republic they postp

o worse evils and a subverting of the constitution. After long strife against the domination of Pompeius, Cato resolved to supp

plea of legitimacy), a faction in the Senate worked the constitution against Caesar. The proconsul refused to yield. NotesPa

CTATOR PageBook=>047 SULLA was the first Roman to lead an army against Rome. Not of his own choosing his enemies had w

ies had won control of the government and deprived him of the command against Mithridates. Again, when he landed in Italy after

aly after an absence of nearly five years, force was his only defence against the party that had attacked a proconsul who was f

His work done, the Dictator resigned. The conquest of Gaul, the war against Pompeius and the establishment of the Dictatorshi

revealed, an overwhelming majority in the Senate, nearly four hundred against twenty-two, wished both dynasts to lay down their

r had succeeded in ensnaring Pompeius and in working the constitution against the craftiest politician of the day: he was decla

is command before a certain day. By invoking constitutional sanctions against Caesar, a small faction misrepresented the true w

iberties of the Roman People, that all the land would rise as one man against the invader. Nothing of the kind happened. Italy

legions joined battle on the plain of Pharsalus, the odds lay heavily against Caesar. Fortune, the devotion of his veteran legi

Caesar knew that secret enemies would soon direct that deadly weapon against one who had used it with such dexterity in the pa

nd the solid benefits of peace and order might abate men’s resentment against Caesar, insensibly disposing their minds to servi

Caesar was an ally and agent of the dynast Pompeius. They now turned against the oligarchs. Catullus and Calvus were dead: the

dly weapons in the hand of his rival, namely the appeal to the People against oligarchy, oppression and murder: cum duce Sull

under the third consulate of Pompeius. 5 Luxury and vice were alleged against Sallustius: the enemies of Ap. Claudius could hav

ar’s following was dual in composition. The fact that he took up arms against the party in power, had been a Marian and a popul

y and in his policy. The majority of the leading consulars was massed against him. No matter Caesar’s faction numbered not only

irth and station. The plebs would not have given preference and votes against Caesar for one of themselves or for a mere munici

s and to P. Servilius Isauricus. 4 Lepidus could recall a family feud against Pompeius; and his consular brother had been won t

to the station he had himself so arduously attained. For protection against his enemies Caesar appealed to the legions, devot

quis iure esse potuit? ’ PageBook=>073 classes or high finance against Caesar. 1 The financier Atticus will have been ab

al friends of Caesar: it may be presumed that he gave them guarantees against revolution. They had more to fear from Pompeius,

ain of the Vocontii who had led the cavalry of his tribe for Pompeius against Sertorius, receiving as a reward the Roman citize

reward the Roman citizenship; his brother likewise served in the war against Mithridates. His son, Pompeius Trogus, was the co

nor the native tribe of the Gaetuli had forgotten Marius and the war against Jugurtha. 1 In the East kings, dynasts and citi

ploit a change. In Egypt Caesar could support a candidate, Cleopatra, against her sister and the ministers of the Ptolemaic Cou

is lineage back to Attius Tullus, a king of the Volsci who had fought against Rome. 3 Yet there was no lack of evidence, quit

Scipiones, namely the Fabii and the Valerii, adopted a vigorous ally against them, in the person of a wealthy farmer, M. Porci

ncied that he would aspire to the consulate. Marius nursed resentment against the nobiles and sought to break through their mon

ota Italia. The reality was very different. 2 The recent war of Italy against Rome must not be forgotten. When Caesar invaded I

land through the Marsi and Paeligni down to Samnium and Lucania rose against Rome and fought for freedom and justice. 3 They

without whom no triumph had ever been celebrated whether they fought against Rome or for her. 4 The Marsi provided the first i

less revealing: it was a holy alliance, a coniuratio of eight peoples against Rome, in the name of Italy. Italia they stamped a

3 The power and wealth of the Pompeii no doubt raised up many enemies against them in their own country. Sulmo of the Paeligni

er the Senate. The people, unfriendly to begin with, turned sharply against them. Accident blended with design. The funeral o

means clear that it suited his plans to make a violent demonstration against the Liberators neither Antonius nor the Caesarian

Imperator, in defence of whose station and dignity they took up arms against his enemies, had been treacherously slain by thos

er the Battle of Munda, conducted guerrilla warfare with some success against the Caesarian governors in the far West. In Syria

s who undermined his predominance, stole his partisans, and contrived against him the last coup d’état of all, the national fro

uence, of rancour, of misrepresentation. Many of the charges levelled against the character of Antonius such as unnatural vice

y, accorded a wide indulgence. The failings of Antonius may have told against him but in Rome and in Italy rather than with the

y colonies. He was absent for a month. Various intrigues were devised against him but came to nothing. When he returned, it was

thynia in 45, took away with him his army of three legions to be used against Bassus, P-W XIV, 1556. Ch. VIII CAESAR’S HEIR

ld his adopted son have succeeded in playing off the Republican cause against the Caesarian leaders, survived the War of Perusi

ular L. Calpurnius Piso. The balance in politics seemed to be turning against Antonius: he would have to make a choice. Sanguin

tom bore heavily on Antonius and stayed the hand he would have raised against Caesar’s heir. The word of the veterans silenced

d armed domination. A fair prospect of concord or a subtle intrigue against the consul had been brought to nought. Antonius

oon took the measure of Antonius: the Caesarian soldier was a warning against the more generous virtues and vices. Another em

ries of Octavianus were conscious and consistent. To assert himself against Antonius, the young revolutionary needed an army

al more on his own initiative and resources, training them in warfare against Alpine tribes. This was serious. Antonius therefo

a consular was ready on the side of Antonius with a bill of attainder against Octavianus. 1 Nothing came of this perhaps the si

not merely been split and shattered: it was being rebuilt, this time against Antonius, by a hostile alliance of Caesarian and

er his primacy was menaced. Senate, plebs and veterans were mobilized against him. His enemies had drawn the sword: naked force

etium. The veterans in the private army of Octavianus would not stand against Antonius, the Caesarian general: yet Antonius was

nd against Antonius, the Caesarian general: yet Antonius was impotent against the heir of the Dictator. Once again the ghost of

uitable and conservative sentiments and ready to defend his interests against Roman tribunes. The family appears to have sided

mp;c. PageBook=>130 The best party is but a kind of conspiracy against the Commonwealth. Octavianus’ following could not

ageBook=>135 IN the Senate three men of consular rank had spoken against Antonius, namely L. Piso, P. Servilius and Cicero

Suetonius, De rhet. 4. PageBook=>137 levying of a private army against a consul of the Roman People. Servilius, howeve

im, he will put up with servitude. ’3 But Cicero was able to hold out against Caesar. Though in the Senate he was once moved to

onius uttered threats. Cicero appeared on September 2nd and protested against the actions of the consul. His observations were

een restored in the Caesarian party. Again, in the first two speeches against Antonius, no word of the young Caesar: yet the ex

ing the real designs of Octavianus and doubting his capacity to stand against Antonius. Octavianus for his part exerted every a

o cannot be acquitted. Aware of the risks, he hoped to use Octavianus against Antonius and discard him in the end, if he did no

tal plan all over again the doom of Antonius would warn the young man against aspiring to military despotism and would reveal t

y, perilously based on Etruria, Brutus in the Cisalpina, contumacious against a consul. As they were both acting on private ini

cero. Summoning all his oratory and all his energies for the struggle against Antonius, eager for war and implacable, he would

battle for what he believed to be the Republic, liberty and the laws against the forces of anarchy or despotism. He would stan

exercise in petty rancour and impudent defamation like the invectives against Piso. The other speeches against Antonius, howeve

udent defamation like the invectives against Piso. The other speeches against Antonius, however, may be counted, for vigour, pa

at their old games. Cicero and the ambiguous contest of the Republic against a recalcitrant proconsul occupy the stage and com

wisdom of raising up Caesar’s heir, through violence and illegal arms against Antonius, there were clearly two opinions. Octavi

.). PageBook=>148 virtus (without always being able to prevail against posterity or the moral standards of another age),

rtis’, a pillar of Rome’s empire and honour. 9 L. Piso, for his stand against Antonius, acquires the temporary label of a good

the proconsul, trapped by Pompeius and the oligarchs, turned his arms against the government ‘in order to liberate himself and

e explained the noble motives that induced him to waive his hostility against the rulers of Rome, Pompeius, Crassus and Caesar.

nibus omissis summae rei p. consulatis’(i.e. especially Cicero’s feud against Antonius). 5 Ib. 10, 11, 3: ‘non me impedient p

us for the State are right and lawful’. 7 Extraordinary commands were against the spirit of the constitution8 but they might be

a party might find that the constitution was being perversely invoked against them: what if the People should appear misguided

ric upon treason. 1 He demonstrated that if a private army was raised against Antonius, if his troops were mutinous and seditio

n the plea of public emergency and the charge of levying armed forces against the State. Now the champion of the constitution h

of power by the Senate or rather, by a faction in the Senate and war against the proconsul Antonius. That prospect was cheerfu

for the struggle? The authority of the Senate was now to be played against the People and the army commanders. As at present

olitical groups were conspicuously absent from the Senate that fought against Antonius. The assassins of Caesar had left Italy,

to him, along with the consuls, the direction of military operations against Antonius, with the title of pro-praetor. 2 Furthe

not coupled with the official sanction given to a private adventurer against a proconsul of the Roman People. The extreme pr

d plunged the world into war. The lesson must have provided arguments against the adoption of irrevocable measures. Under the

Cicero’s proposal to confer upon Cassius the commission of making war against Dolabella, with an extraordinary command over all

to concord. To that end they urged an accommodation. Servilius spoke against it. Cicero supported him, with lavish praises for

f Lepidus and Plancus. Antonius and the Liberators might even combine against their common enemy civil wars have witnessed stra

his all. Sextus Pompeius had already promised his aid to the Republic against Antonius. He was rewarded by a vote of thanks on

send to the Senate should have deceived nobody. The two armies lay against each other for a time. A small river ran between

C 3, 19. PageBook=>165 intervened. Lepidus was not as vigilant against the dangers of fraternization as had been the gen

e Senate sent him no instructions; nor could he have marched to Italy against the will of the ambiguous Lepidus; further, his t

ssive faction, mobilizing private armies and constitutional sanctions against a proconsul. Where and with whom stood now the le

to obey the constitutional principles invoked by faction and to fight against their fellow-citizens had the result that they we

y that coalition had already collapsed; Caesar’s heir turned his arms against his associates and was marching on Rome. Fate was

ism there was something highly distasteful in Cicero’s fanatical feud against Antonius. Brutus had not broken off all relations

pidus, who had married his own half-sister. Family ties had prevailed against political hostility in civil wars before now when

eeks a propitious master. Brutus for his part will continue the fight against all powers that set themselves above the law. ’6

e to destroy him Octavianus in his true colours, openly on their side against Caesar’s murderer. The designs of Octavianus up

nia, he instructed the other consul to revoke the decrees of outlawry against Antonius and Lepidus for Lepidus, too, had been d

riage- alliance: this time the soldiery insisted on a solid guarantee against dissension in the Caesarian party. Octavianus gav

command assigned to him by the Senate earlier in the year for the war against Antonius. NotesPage=>189 1 Ad fam. 10, 21,

onsul of Africa Vetus in 44 B.C., remained there, loyal to the Senate against Antonius and refusing to recognize the Triumvirat

, and the Dictator stood above parties. He did not champion one class against another. If he had begun a revolution, his next a

of Sulla suffered at last. The Triumvirs declared a regular vendetta against the rich,2 whether dim, inactive senators or paci

needs. For the future, to recompense the legions which were to be led against the Republicans, the Triumvirs set apart the terr

ius, who by now had won possession of all Sicily, sending Salvidienus against him. 5 Lack of ships frustrated an invasion of th

only weak spot in the forces of the Republic: would the legions stand against the name and fortune of Caesar? From his war-ches

he Via Egnatia, invulnerable on the flanks, which rested to the north against mountains, to the south on a marsh. Brutus pitche

iant and vocal. 3 The urban plebs cheerfully joined in manifestations against the unpopular tyranny of the Triumvirs. In the Se

osition to Octavianus was not merely a revolt of middle-class opinion against the military despotism of the Triumvirate or an i

δορίληπτοι. 4 Dio 48, 9, 4 f. PageBook=>208 men of property against a rapacious proletariat in arms: it blended with

ought at the expense of Italy. Denied justice and liberty, Italy rose against Rome for the last time. It was not the fierce peo

hich had been loyal to Rome then, but had fought for the Marian cause against Sulla. Now a new Sulla shattered their strength a

t such an alliance of Caesarians and Republicans as he had stirred up against Antonius nearly three years earlier. In alarm he

in the account of Appian, where he appears as a champion of Libertas against military despotism, of the consular power against

hampion of Libertas against military despotism, of the consular power against the Triumvirate (BC 5, 19, 74; 43, 179 ff.; 54, 2

217 and672111. 2 Ib. 672126: ‘L(eg.) xι I Divom Iulium’; ib. 67215 ( against Fulvia); ib. 672113: ‘L Antoni calve peristi | C.

obscure. Pollio retired north- eastwards and held Venetia for a time against the generals of Octavianus. Then all is a blank,

n Fuficius Fango, fighting with valour and resource in a confused war against T. Sextius, the former governor, who had remained

anus the adventurer, after achieving recognition with Republican help against the domination of Antonius, deserted and proscrib

ficulty in inducing the veterans from the colonies to rally and march against Antonius; some turned back. 4 Octavianus might co

3784). PageBook=>218 Was there no end to the strife of citizen against citizen? No enemy in Italy, Marsian or Etruscan,

e. Her own strength and her own sons laid her low. 1 The war of class against class, the dominance of riot and violence, the di

m freed the energies of Rome. Antonius at once dispatched Ventidius against the enemy. With Ventidius went as his legate or q

, 320) mentions the Dardani, but there is no record of any operations against them. The history of Macedonia in the years 38-32

uring basis and make war, for revenge, for prestige and for security, against the Parthians. After Samosata, Antonius left legi

de. For the present, his colleague was constrained to support the war against Pompeius. From his fleet Antonius resigned one hu

mpeius. From his fleet Antonius resigned one hundred and twenty ships against the promise of twenty thousand legionary soldiers

2 she married a kinsman, Ti. Claudius Nero, who had fought for Caesar against Pompeius, for L. Antonius and the Republic in the

peius rendered thanks to his protecting deity: in Rome the mob rioted against Octavianus and the war. NotesPage=>230 1 L

my of three legions in Asia, with which force he contended for a time against the NotesPage=>231 1 Dio 48, 49, 4 2 For

of Rome from famine placated the urban plebs that had rioted so often against the Triumvirs. Their iron rule in Italy, while it

xploring the propaganda and the sentiments that might serve him later against Antonius, winning for personal domination the nam

k: Norbanus was the general who along with Saxa opened the operations against the Liberators in Macedonia. Nor are senators’ so

tia. These dangers had been threatened or experienced in Caesar’s war against Pompeius Magnus. By Octavianus’ foresight and str

and service in war. ‘Ex virtute nobilitas coepit. ’5 Then Rome’s wars against foreign enemies had augmented the aristocracy wit

some success a few years later charges of highway robbery outstanding against certain senators could at last be annulled. 3 T

ge and alliance with Antonius. The Catonian faction, after fighting against the domination of Pompeius, recognized a greater

ecognized a greater danger and hoped to use Pompeius for the Republic against Caesar. Failing in that, it conspired with dissid

istent and suspect a just war, fought in defence of freedom and peace against a foreign enemy: a degenerate Roman was striving

ius: she was planning a war of revenge that was to array all the East against Rome, establish herself as empress of the world a

contrived by the party of Octavianus. It was not a war for domination against Antonius Antonius must not be mentioned. To secur

ferior expedients, mere detestation of eastern monarchs and prejudice against the alien allies of his rival the low-born Amynta

mestic and intimate purposes. Messalla wrote at least three pamphlets against Antonius (Charisius, GL 104, 18; 129, 7; 146, 34)

own policy, accusing Sosius and Antonius. None dared to raise a voice against the Caesarian leader. Octavianus then dismissed t

emble again on a fixed day, when he would supply documentary evidence against Antonius. The consuls in protest fled to Antoni

oyal it was packed with the timid and the time-serving, ready to turn against him if they dared: it was a bad sign that more th

the contest to be fought? For Rome, for the consuls and the Republic against the domination of Octavianus, or for Egypt and Eg

Levi, Ottaviano Capoparte 11, 139 ff. Both Holmes and Levi seem to be against Kromayer’s thesis of a marriage in 37/36 B.C. Dif

ith subsequent repercussions. 1 Ahenobarbus was steadfast all through against the blandishments of Cleopatra, refusing even to

he land rose as one man in patriotic ardour, clamouring for a crusade against the foreign enemy. Yet, on the other hand, the un

n he so eloquently justified a Catilinarian venture and armed treason against a consul, was able to invoke the plea of a ‘highe

vision of lands, Scipio Aemilianus and his friends, championing Italy against the plebs of Rome, got help from Italian men of p

ynast’s popularity. 2 Cicero, again, proclaimed the consensus Italiae against Antonius in the War of Mutina. 3 In vain it did n

ssion. Italia was first invoked as a political and sentimental notion against Rome by the peoples of Italy, precisely the Itali

allegiance bound followers to a political leader in a private quarrel against his enemies, his inimici, not the enemies of the

rable character, L. Visidius, had done for Cicero’s consensus Italiae against Antonius. 1 Many senators had fled to Antonius. R

gypt. The most ardent exponents of the national unity and the crusade against the East were no doubt to be found in the order o

, Antonius might not need to appeal to the legions to stand in battle against their kinsmen. He might be able to employ sea-pow

neither Pompeius nor the Liberators had achieved when they contended against invaders coming from Italy. If that was his pla

invest his position proved a signal failure. The plan had been turned against him—he was now encompassed and shut in. Famine an

io so, 14, 1 f. PageBook=>296 Then the odds moved more heavily against him. Desertion set in. Certain of the vassal prin

tium was a shabby affair, the worthy climax to the ignoble propaganda against Cleopatra, to the sworn and sacred union of all I

, 2. 4 Cf. W. W. Tarn, JRS XXI (1931), 179 ff. PageBook=>298 against the bestial divinities of Nile. Against Rome were

marshals, also perished. Loyal to Antonius, he shared in the calumny against his leader and suffered a double detraction. They

Minor—for the Mede would hold both Armenia and Parthia in check. Yet against Parthia Octavianus neither bore resentment nor th

for the War of Actium and for the War of Alexandria—all wars of Rome against a foreign enemy. The martial glory of the renasce

ecution for high treason in the law courts the Senate passed a decree against the offender. Gallus took his own life (27 B.C.).

in virtue of his auctoritas. Augustus’ own words (Res Gestae 6) tell against this theory. 2 Res Gestae 34, cf. ILS 82 (a cop

den of the more powerful of the armed provinces, stood as a guarantee against any recurrence of the anarchy out of which his do

ius who had fallen as Caesar’s enemy, as a champion of the Free State against military despotism. Virgil in the Aeneid, when he

ther ex-Antonian and former public enemy, still nursed his resentment against Cicero’s character and Cicero’s style; and Pollio

ephew Brutus, who proclaimed a firm determination to fight to the end against any power that set itself above the laws, would h

with doles, amused them with games and claimed to be their protector against oppression. Free elections returned—that is to sa

.) in Illyricum, c. 17-16 and c. 14-13 respectively. 3 By campaigns against the Salassi conducted by C. Antistius Vetus in 35

In 26 B.C. Augustus took the field in person. 4 He marched northwards against the Cantabrians from a base near Burgos. The natu

raigned in the courts for high treason on a charge of having made war against the kingdom of Thrace without authority. Primus a

o 54, 4, 1 (22 B.C.). 2 M. Vinicius in Gaul (Dio 53, 26, 4), Murena against the Salassi (Dio 53, 25, 3 &c). 3 CIL 12, p

assassination and augmented yet more by Octavianus to finance his war against Antonius. 2 The spoils of victory and the revenue

rmies of the Roman People Pollio, whose grandfather led the Marrucini against Rome, Ventidius from Picenum and the Marsian Popp

whose name, nation and sentiments had so recently been arrayed in war against Rome. But Italy now extended to the Alps, embraci

n the Fasti. In the seven years 39-33 nineteen novi homines appear as against nine nobiles. 2 After seizing power in 32 B.C. Oc

. Of the consuls of the period 25-19 B.C., eight come of new families against five nobles. 3 The restored Republic, it is evide

s appear on the Fasti, both with military service to their credit, as against eleven nobiles. 1 Conspicuous among the latter ar

rained in the wars of the Revolution and whose mature skill, directed against foreign enemies, augmented the glory and the secu

ssed over, such as M. Lurius and P. Carisius, both of whom had served against Sex. Pompeius and elsewhere. But L. Tarius Rufus,

d even then they would hardly be able to induce the soldiers to march against their patron and imperator. Augustus both creat

8), whose son L. Arruntius Camillus Scribonianus (PIR2, A 1140) rose against Claudius Caesar. 2 Certain Lentuli took the cog

ntonius required all Caesar’s influence behind him: he was contending against Ahenobarbus. 2 Augustus’ revival of ancient col

ed front in a political emergency. Against Catilina, perhaps, but not against Pompeius or Caesar. When it came to maintaining p

Dalmatia): ‘P. Silio | P. f. procos. I patron. | d. d.’ Silius fought against the Camunni and Vennones. 4 Horace, Odes 4, 4 a

d reached the Elbe. 5 In 9 B.C. Drusus died, and two more campaigns against the Germans were conducted by Tiberius. Then in 6

us, had served under his patron continuously, in the Spanish wars and against Mithridates. 3 He was one of the three legates wh

Among his achievements (perhaps before his consulate) was a campaign against the Marmaridae, a tribe of the African desert dwe

ssembly of the People might declare war but the People did not decide against whom; the wars, however grandiose and arduous the

all too well founded. The propaganda of Octavianus had been merciless against Fulvia, the wife of Antonius; and Rome had fought

inst Fulvia, the wife of Antonius; and Rome had fought a national war against a political woman, the Queen of Egypt. The moral

Cn. Cornelius Cinna, a grandson of Pompeius Magnus, was conspiring against the Princeps. Augustus sought the advice of Livia

gnitudini fidebat. ’ PageBook=>417 Tiberius revolted. Obdurate against the threats of Augustus and the entreaties of his

a custodia Neronem urbis. ’ PageBook=>420 When Cinna conspired against his life or was suspected of conspiracy Augustus

Scipio were all relegated. 5 The offence may have been transgression against the Leges Juliae: the punishment went beyond that

dultero peteret. ’ This purports to derive from Augustus’ accusations against his daughter. The same source can be detected in

misdemeanour. The charges of rapacity and avarice elsewhere levelled against this powerful and unpopular ally of the Princeps

ked to palliate his execution for conspiracy. 4 The charges brought against Agrippa Postumus had been more vague, his treatme

sorely and wrung from his inhuman composure the despairing complaint against Varus for the lost legions. 1 In A.D. 13 the succ

hough he has the advantage over Caesar in Virgil’s solemn exhortation against civil war. As for Antonius, he was the archetype

iciled in Latium. Though the national spirit of Rome was a reaction against Hellas, there was no harm, but every advantage, i

truria was martial. 6 The fiercest of the Italici had recently fought against Rome in the last struggle of the peoples of the A

saw the Marsian and the Picene leading the legions of Rome to battle against the Parthians; and the Principate, for all its pr

bserve with mixed feelings the disreputable conduct proved or alleged against a Vibidius, a Titedius, a Bruttedius. 1 The nec

an and Greek. The War of Actium was shown to be a contest not so much against Greece as against Egypt and the East. The contest

War of Actium was shown to be a contest not so much against Greece as against Egypt and the East. The contest was perpetuated u

the Avenger had been vowed by Caesar’s son at Philippi when he fought against the assassins of his parent, the enemies of the F

ion for Roman intervention and for Roman rule was the defence of Gaul against the German invader. When the Romans set out to co

onsible for the transgressions of the wealthy. Rome seldom intervened against the local dynasts. C. Julius Eurycles, the lord o

nown worse, and could see no prospect of a successful war for liberty against the legions and colonies of Rome. In origin, the

of free speech, as no order else in the New State. They demonstrated against the moral code and later clamoured loudly that Ju

abandoned habits, organized a procession of society ladies in protest against Quirinius, her former husband. The spectators res

ad gone very far. 3 This is the argument in Tacitus, Ann. 1, 10 not against the Principate but against the Princeps. PageBo

is the argument in Tacitus, Ann. 1, 10 not against the Principate but against the Princeps. PageBook=>480 That might be

4 The last years of Augustus witnessed stern measures of repression against noxious literature. 5 Public bonfires were instit

cipated conviction by suicide, after a noble speech defending history against oppression and despotism. 6 His works were condem

t be safe after death to attack or traduce the Founder was an offence against the State. Not all emperors, however, were succee

he patrician Cornelii, the Lentuli, who had also decided for Pompeius against Caesar, but were more fortunate in duration. 1 Th

and the last Appius Claudius Pulcher, were put to death for offences against the State. 2 Another noble, a Sempronius Gracchus

randnephew of the Dictator, an Octavius from Velitrae, after fighting against the great houses, attached them to his family and

sband of Drusilla, alleged to have conspired with Lentulus Gaetulicus against Caligula and executed in A.D. 39 (Suetonius, Cal.

lies down to ruin. 1 A descendant of Pompeius Magnus raised civil war against Claudius. 2 The Cornelii Lentuli grew smaller a

uin of Lentulus Gaetulicus, who was suppressed for alleged conspiracy against Caligula, and the family can show no consuls in a

name, spared by Domitian, could not escape allegations of conspiracy against both Nerva and Trajan. 8 He was duly relegated, b

authentic champions of that ideal, Brutus and Cassius, who had fought against Caesar’s heir at Philippi, could not have been in

enience. Cato was already out of the way when Octavianus took up arms against the State. But Cato was worshipped as a martyr of

earliest native historian of note, Cato the Censor, made his protest against this practice, omitting the names of generals in

and Cato wrote of Italy as well as of Rome. 2 But Cato was powerless against Roman tradition. The banker Atticus was more typi

or to invent an obscure origin, a repulsive character and evil deeds against the novi homines prominent in the oligarchy. No

ny other dispensation. Hence Libertas could be invoked as a catchword against unpopular rulers, to stamp their power as illicit

15 ff., 141 ff.; with Cicero, 140 f.; actions in the autumn, 123 ff.; against the Senate, 162 ff.; his legal position, 162, 168

his campaign towards the Caucasus, 224, 264; in 35–33 B.C., 265, 266; against Cleopatra, 280; in the War of Actium, 294, 296 f.

98. Carthage, fall of, in relation to Roman history, 154, 249; wars against Carthage promote novi homines, 19, 238, 244; alta

ed centurion, 355. Consilia, of the Princeps, 408 ff. Conspiracies, against Augustus, 298, 333 f., 414, 426 f., 432, 444, 478

287, 306, 442, 490; his party, 18 if.; marries a Metella, 20, 31; war against Marius, 16 f., 65, 87 ff., 249, 491; punishes Etr

s. 74 B.C.), his eastern command, 21, 29, 48, 385; in retirement, 23; against Pompeius, 33; insolently treated by Caesar, 56; d

, 89 f. Marius, T., soldier from Urvinum, 353, 354. Marmaridae, war against , 399. PageBook=>555 Maroboduus, King of th

stria’, 375 f., 397; virtues, 456; vices, 510; wealth, 381; prejudice against , 357 f., 509 f.; rehabilitation of, 511 f.; desce

8 f.; an Antonian, 266, 269; governor of Cyrene, 298. Pirates, wars against , 29, 31, 228. Pisa, patriotic town-council of,

ry, 34, 100; hates Italians and bankers, 26; opposes Pompeius, 33 f.; against Caesar, 34; his policy in 52 B.C., 37, 46; misses

rvilia, 23; influence on Brutus, 58; philosophical studies, 57; feuds against Pompeius and Caesar, 26 f., 46; laudations of Cat

125; political, 154 ff., 208, 218, 256; poetry as, 251 ff., 460 ff.; against Antonius and Cleopatra, 270 f., 273, 275, 289, 30

a Nova for Caesar, 110 f.; retires from politics, 247 f.; allegations against his character, 250; his historical writings, 248

; an Antonian, 206, 222; joins Octavianus, 237, 238, 368; allegations against Antonius, 277; his consulate, 291; in Gaul and Sy

us, 277; his consulate, 291; in Gaul and Syria, 302 f., 309; campaign against Salassi, 329; repairs Via Latina, 402; declines t

consulate, 188; in Gaul, 189, 202, 210; in the Perusine War, 210 ff.; against the Parthians, 223 f.; his triumph, 224, 231, 241