quarter of a century, his ally and contemporary, the robust Agrippa; no schemer could have counted in advance upon the de

cious title, the change in the definition of authority, all that made no difference to the source and facts of power. Domi

ecame ‘Princeps’. He did not cease to be Imperator Caesar. There is no breach in continuity. Twenty years of crowded his

itus, in his brief summary of the rise of Augustus {Ann, i, 2), makes no reference at all to the ‘Restoration of the Repub

Antonius. The last year of Cicero’s life, full of glory and eloquence no doubt, was ruinous to the Roman People. Posteri

tinction of the old aristocracy. Pollio was a contemporary, in fact no small part of the transactions which he narrated

d when the Republic went down at Philippi. That Pollio chose to write no further will readily be understood. As it was, hi

he could not treat his subject with freedom and with veracity. It was no other than Claudius, a pupil of Livy. 3 His maste

ictator bears the heavier blame for civil war. In truth, Pompeius was no better ‘occultior non melior’. 2 And Pompeius is

People was revealed in signal and continuous calamities: the gods had no care for virtue or justice, but intervened only t

ed, many of them obscure or casually known. 1 The remainder have left no record of activity or fame in a singularly well-d

agistracy of the Roman Republic2 he might rise to the praetorship but no higher, save by a rare combination of merit, indu

sertive in the Senate, more candid to his intimate friends. There was no breach in the walls a faction among the nobiles h

ot even a property-qualification. The letter of the law likewise knew no distinction between rich and poor. 4 Nepos, Vit

=>014 from ambition and wedded to quiet, the knights could claim no title of civic virtue, no share in the splendour

nd wedded to quiet, the knights could claim no title of civic virtue, no share in the splendour and pride of the governing

eir enmity will be reckoned Lucullus, Catilina and Gabinius. It was no accident, no mere manifestation of Roman conserva

ll be reckoned Lucullus, Catilina and Gabinius. It was no accident, no mere manifestation of Roman conservatism or snobb

would suffice. A programme, it is true, he developed, negative but by no means despicable. 1 NotesPage=>015 1 H. St

d tota Italia. But it was an ideal rather than a programme: there was no Ciceronian party. The Roman politician had to be

ed to themselves the name of populares often sinister and fraudulent, no better than their rivals, the men in power, who n

t. ’ The passage refers to the generation after 70 B.C. Cf., however, no less pessimistic remarks about an earlier period,

imistic remarks about an earlier period, Hist, 1, 12 M. 2 There was no party of the populares; cf. H. Strasburger, in th

e from the Gauls, had vanished utterly by now, or at least could show no more consuls. The Sulpicii and Manlii had lost pr

owever, persisted, unchanged in their alarming versatility. There was no epoch of Rome’s history but could show a Claudius

whose activities did so much to precipitate the Bellum Italicum, left no son of his blood. His sister was twice married, t

policy: only a few venerable relics, or recent consuls with birth but no weight. NotesPage=>022 1 The family of his

and talent. There were two young Metelli, Celer and Nepos in capacity no exception to their family. 2 Next came their cous

f Ap. Pulcher. Of these Claudii, the character of the eldest was made no more amiable by early struggles and expedients to

d, M. Calpurnius Bibulus, an honest man, a stubborn character, but of no great moment in politics. 3 Roman noble houses,

‘hated by heaven and by the nobility’, for good reasons. 4 There were no words to describe Cn. Pompeius the son. After his

er’s death, protected by influential politicians, he lay low, lurking no doubt in Picenum. 5 When Sulla landed at Brundisi

and legislation. To gain office from the votes of the sovran people, no surer password than the favour shown or pretended

ord than the favour shown or pretended of Pompeius; to reject a bill, no argument needed save that the measure was aimed a

‘the warden of earth and sea’. 2 Not so menacing to outward show, but no less real and pervasive, was his influence in the

al and equestrian orders derived, as was fitting, from Picenum men of no great social distinction, the hungry sons of a po

ying another woman of that house. 2 The alliance with the Metelli, by no means unequivocal or unclouded, endured for some

be captured by the government at a certain stage in his career, with no discredit to either. Caesar’s choice was still op

rch, Caesar 14; Pompeius 47). Münzer (RA, 338 f.) argues that this is no other than Brutus, adopted by his maternal uncle

ad also prosecuted an ex-consul hostile to Pompeius. 3 But Caesar was no mere adherent of Pompeius: by holding aloof he en

Italy, for five years. Pompeius’ purpose was flagrant there could be no pretext of public emergency, as for the eastern c

s for the next year, L. Calpurnius Piso, a cultivated aristocrat with no marked political activities, and A. Gabinius, a P

ius, from his kinsmen the Metelli, and from Crassus, a combination in no way anomalous. 3 NotesPage=>036 1 Ad Att.

the consulate, was signally defeated, to the satisfaction of Pompeius no less than of Caesar. Two years passed, heavy wi

e enemies of Caesar might prevail at the consular elections, that was no unmixed advantage. The Marcelli were rash but uns

4, 4. Marcellus’ flogging of a man of Comum had been premature and by no means to the liking of Pompeius (Ad Att. 5, 11, 2

ice. 2 Caelius’ enemies drove him to Caesar’s side. Ap. Pulcher was no adornment to the party of Cato. Already another l

ent of the issue, ib. § 2. PageBook=>042 Caesar would tolerate no superior, Pompeius no rival. 1 Caesar had many en

§ 2. PageBook=>042 Caesar would tolerate no superior, Pompeius no rival. 1 Caesar had many enemies, provoked by his

ll such palpable and painful testimony. The party of the Republic was no place for a novus homo: the Lentuli were synonymo

51), dismayed by the outbreak of war or distrustful of Pompeius, took no active part and should more honestly be termed ne

eparation for war, may have impaired his decision. 3 Yet his plan was no mere makeshift, as it appeared to his allies, but

rsaries pointed out. From Pompeius, from Cato and from the oligarchy, no hope of reform. But Caesar seemed different: he h

n People. About Caesar’s ultimate designs there can be opinion, but no certainty. The acts and projects of his Dictators

the diadem. But monarchy presupposes hereditary succession, for which no provision was made by Caesar. The heir to Caesar’

t’, as one of his friends was subsequently to remark. 2 And there was no going back. To Caesar’s clear mind and love of ra

sense of impotence and frustration he had been all things and it was no good. 3 He had surpassed the good fortune of Sull

ed out the assassination of the Dictator. That his removal would be no remedy but a source of greater ills to the Common

piracy, might lend plausible colouring to such a theory. Yet it is in no way evident that the nature of Brutus would have

the dour and military Cassius, was of the Epicurean persuasion and by no means a fanatic. 2 As for the tenets of the Stoic

a provincial command and finally the praetorship in 44 B.C. Yet Cato, no sooner dead, asserted the old domination over his

in truth was more conservative and Roman than many have fancied; and no Roman conceived of government save through an oli

ina could not, or would not, understand that reform or revolution had no place in the designs of his employer. Crassus dre

head and front of the nobilitas, paramount in public dignity, but by no means invulnerable to scrutiny of morals and meri

ve in the year of Pharsalus. The Pompeians deducted, fourteen remain: no match, however, in eminence. Few of them were of

partisan, commanding armies, namely Cn. Domitius Calvinus, and he was no better than his colleague Messalla or his illustr

needy senators and winning the support of daring agents. There was no scope for talent or ideas on the other side. The

. 5 Caesar’s generosity, revealed in corruption and patronage, knew no limits at all. The most varied motives, ideals

P. Servilius was a man of some competence: Lepidus had influence but no party, ambition but not the will and the power fo

his friend and patron, attacking the memory of Cato. History can show no writings of Pansa, or of C. Matius, the Caesarian

be but Balbus, the friend of such eminent citizens, could surely have no enemies. 4 Balbus won. But for the failure of cer

had more to fear from Pompeius, and they knew it. Caesar’s party had no monopoly of the bankrupts and terrorists; 2 while

propinquity and duration. In Verona the father of the poet Catullus, no doubt a person of substance, was the friend and h

tisans, from senators down to soldiers and freedmen? There were to be no proscriptions. But Caesar acquired the right to s

estorship: in fact, the wealth and standing of a knight was requisite no exorbitant condition. Sons of freedmen had sat in

t the Dictator promoted partisans from the ranks of the legions, with no interval of time or status. An ex-centurion could

ian, others of native extraction. The antithesis is incomplete and of no legal validity. At the very least, colonial Roman

eir gains were derived from banking, industry or farming, pursuits in no way exclusive. Rome outshines the cities of Italy

, a king of the Volsci who had fought against Rome. 3 Yet there was no lack of evidence, quite plausible and sometimes c

pendent and martial peoples, the Marsi in the forefront, without whom no triumph had ever been celebrated whether they fou

, Bellum Marsicum. The name Bellum Italicum is more comprehensive and no less revealing: it was a holy alliance, a coniura

read and involved the allies. Reminded of other grievances and seeing no redress from Rome after the failure and death of

e, a grant which had never been sincerely made; and many Italians had no use for it. Loyalties were still personal, local

aly and kept alive the memory of defeat and suffering. There could be no reconciliation until a long time had elapsed. S

s homo. No evidence, however, that he was generous in act and policy, no man from remoter Italy whom he helped into the Se

and policy, no man from remoter Italy whom he helped into the Senate, no novus homo for whom he strove in defiance of the

en Atina, had long been integral members of the Roman State. It was no part of Cicero’s policy to flood the Senate with

ter his great exploits in Gaul. 3 The power and wealth of the Pompeii no doubt raised up many enemies against them in thei

y of Sertorius in the Caesarians Vatinius and Sallustius. 6 They were no doubt followed by knights whom Caesar promoted. C

re already in the Senate before the outbreak of the Civil War, though no previous affiliations or service in his army can

ip and by the Revolution. The role of Caesar is evident and important no occasion, therefore, to exaggerate his work, in m

of Murena and of Pompeius’ men, Afranius and Gabinius. 3 After that, no more novi homines as consuls on the Fasti of the

f the plebeians were Claudii Marcelli. 5 Among his legates is found no man with a name ending in ‘-idius’, only one ‘-en

ous suffect consuls as well. For all their admitted talents, it is by no means likely that the Dictator would have given t

d the advances of the Liberators. The Dictator left, and could leave, no heir to his personal rule. But Antonius was both

arty and consul, head of the government. The Ides of March could make no difference to that. When the tyrant fell and the

the Capitol to render thanks to the gods of the Roman State, They had no further plans the tyrant was slain, therefore lib

pian, on whom see E. Schwartz, P-W II, 230), but is suspect. It is by no means clear that it suited his plans to make a vi

They should not have left the consul Antonius alive. But there was no pretext or desire for a reign of terror. Brutus h

e august traditions of the Roman Senate and the Roman People they had no sympathy at all. The politicians of the previous

r revolutionary, despised so utterly the plebs of Rome that they felt no scruples when they enhanced its degradation. Even

oeuvred into a clash with the champions of the People. Symptoms only, no solid ground for optimistic interpretation. Yet e

little to encourage them abroad. The execution of their plot allowed no delay, no attempt to secure a majority of the arm

encourage them abroad. The execution of their plot allowed no delay, no attempt to secure a majority of the army commande

y be presumed, Trebonius went to Asia, Cimber to Bithynia. There were no legions at all in Asia and in Bithynia, only two

may not have been altogether satisfied with his deputy. Yet there is no proof of any serious estrangement. 1 Lepidus, it

idus, it is true, was appointed consul in 46 and Master of the Horse: no evidence, however, that Caesar prized him above A

to show up in deadly abundance. The frank and chivalrous soldier was no match in statecraft for the astute politicians wh

l, is evident and admitted. He belonged to a class of Roman nobles by no means uncommon under Republic or NotesPage=>

and class, and bound to him by ties of personal friendship. 3 He had no quarrel with the Liberators providing they did no

of two agrarian laws passed in the consulate of Antonius. It is by no means clear that the behaviour of Antonius went b

there were rivals here and potential adversaries. Antonius had been no friend of Dolabella in the last three years: yet

se lands he would garrison with the Macedonian legions. For how long, no indication. For the present, the other provinces

us Calvinus, who had fought in Thessaly, Pontus and Africa. There was no public mention of the nobilis P. Sulpicius Rufus,

e profits of a proconsulate. Sex. Peducaeus and A. Allienus carried no weight; and only another war would bring rapid di

about the senatorial gens Octavia. Augustus in his Autobiography saw no occasion to misrepresent the truth in this matter

nx engraved. The revolutionary adventurer eludes grasp and definition no less than the mature statesman. For the early yea

ad faith in his own star. The fortune of Caesar survived his fall. On no rational forecast of events would his adopted son

ormality. 2 Ad fam. 11, 2. 3 Ad Att. 15, 8, 1. But Hirtius was by no means favourable to the Liberators, ib. 14, 6, I

of Rome. When L. Piso spoke, at the session of August 1st, there was no man to support him. Of the tone and content of Pi

n to support him. Of the tone and content of Piso’s proposal there is no evidence: perhaps he suggested that Cisalpine Gau

nius, for his part, had been constrained to an unwelcome decision. In no mood to be thwarted in his ambitions, he still ho

f what was told him when he was absent from Rome. In Cicero, however, no mention of the Ludi Victoriae Caesaris, which rev

e fate of Caesar. 1 Of any immediate intentions the Liberators said no word in their edict. But they now prepared to dep

thing like a national party. So it was to be in the end. But this was no time for an ideal and patriotic appeal. Such we

ere reconciled through the insistence of the soldiery. To Antonius, no grounds for satisfaction. Alert and resilient amo

ert and resilient among the visible risks of march and battle, he had no talent for slow intrigue, no taste for postponed

isible risks of march and battle, he had no talent for slow intrigue, no taste for postponed revenge. Though able beyond e

s consular province, the Cisalpina, at once. Then Plancus would raise no difficulties about Comata. Antonius summoned D. B

ce the annual pay of a legionary, promising, in the event of success, no less than 5,000 denarii. In the colonies of Calat

ash youth appeared to have played into his hands. Of the legal point, no question: Octavianus and his friends were guilty

icia! From dealing with D. Brutus, however, Antonius was impeded by no doubts of his own, by no disloyalty among his tro

D. Brutus, however, Antonius was impeded by no doubts of his own, by no disloyalty among his troops. Out of Rome and libe

. On that subject he preserved monumental discretion, giving visitors no guidance at all. 2 To be sure, he had dissuaded t

o attack and despoil him. 1 The provenance of these resources is by no means clear; neither is the fate of the private f

ivil war. Hirtius was accessible to the sinister influence of Balbus3 no good prospect for the Republicans, but a gain for

, but a gain for Octavianus. Less is known about Pansa. Yet Pansa was no declared enemy of Antonius; 4 and he had married

through the agency of Pompeius and Caesar to the consulate, Piso saw no occasion to protect Cicero from the threat, sente

before and after the proconsul returned, on any excuse. Piso replied, no doubt with some effect. 3 Nor did any political e

he consul on September 2nd. When Octavianus marched on Rome, however, no news was heard of P. Servilius: like other consul

y, however, have been influenced by circumstantial rumours. It was by no means unlikely that Caesar would be entangled and

. He persisted, however, and returned, though heavy of heart and with no prospect at all of playing a directing part in Ro

n politics. 2 So he thought then and the month of September brought no real comfort or confidence. Back in Rome, Cicero

th L. Piso ten years earlier. Between Antonius and Cicero there lay no ancient grudge, no deep-seated cause of an inevit

s earlier. Between Antonius and Cicero there lay no ancient grudge, no deep-seated cause of an inevitable clash: on the

>141 deference. 1 Cicero’s return provoked an incident, but gave no indication that the day of September 2nd would be

In his account of the reasons that moved him to return, Cicero makes no mention of the Ludi Victoriae Caesaris and the co

e Caesarian party. Again, in the first two speeches against Antonius, no word of the young Caesar: yet the existence of An

le or the exhortations of Philippus and of Marcellus were likewise of no weight. 4 Cicero’s path lay through Aquinum, but

olutionary under the sign of the avenging of Caesar. Of that purpose, no secret, no disguise. To be sure, he offered a saf

under the sign of the avenging of Caesar. Of that purpose, no secret, no disguise. To be sure, he offered a safeguard to t

truggle against Antonius, eager for war and implacable, he would hear no word of peace or compromise: he confronted Antoni

ar as a pendant to De officiis. 4 Cicero defined the nature of glory, no doubt showing how far, for all their splendour an

ted virtues of Caesar and of Cato, whom Sallustius, an honest man and no detractor of Cicero, reckoned as the greatest Rom

se were neither fools nor traitors. If they followed Cicero there was no telling where they would end. When Republicans bo

ry could only be won by adopting the adversary’s weapons; and victory no less than defeat would be fatal to everything tha

completion the commentaries of Caesar, he confessed that he could see no end to civil strife. 1 Men recalled not Caesar on

ty, the deeds of Pompeius, and a Brutus besieged at Mutina. There was no respite: at Rome the struggle was prosecuted, in

lity, degrading pursuits and ignoble origin the Roman politician knew no compunction or limit. Hence the alarming picture

d casual evidence reveals the fact that Piso’s Epicurean familiar was no other than the unimpeachable Philodemus from Gada

. From youth he had revelled in cruelty: such had been his lusts that no modest person could mention them. 2 In the prof

f Antonius. Had he been on the right side, he would have been praised no less than that man from Gades, the irreproachable

lest elaboration on that theme belongs to a time when it could do him no harm. 9 Nor was it Caesar’s enemies but his belov

n Vatinius could give as good as he got he seems to have borne Cicero no malice for the speech In Vatinium. 2 It was a poi

: that is to say, according to the canons of Greek political thought, no constitution at all. This meant that a revolution

d by the spirit, and fitted to the fabric, of the Roman constitution: no paradox, but the supreme and authentic revelation

cates; that phrases like concordia ordinum and consensus Italiae were no peculiar monopoly of Cicero, no unique revelation

ia ordinum and consensus Italiae were no peculiar monopoly of Cicero, no unique revelation of patriotism and political sag

usly enlisted. The art was as old as politics, its exponents required no mentors. The purpose of propaganda was threefold

h some attention. PageBook=>155 the profession of which ideals no party can feel secure and sanguine, whatever be t

private feuds should be abandoned. 4 Plancus had assured Cicero that no personal grounds of enmity would ever prevent him

followed the unimpeachable example of the patriotic Lepidus, in word no doubt as well as in deed; Pollio likewise, though

lty they might follow great leaders like Caesar or Antonius: they had no mind to risk their lives for intriguers such as P

fter the end of all the wars the victor proclaimed that he had killed no citizen who had asked for mercy:1 his clemency wa

ed on numerous coins with the legend Ob cives servatos. 2 There was no limit to the devices of fraudulent humanitarians

s allies in the Senate would provide the rest. NotesPage=>161 ( no notes) Ch. XII THE SENATE AGAINST ANTONIUS Pa

d the chance to develop a programme for future action. Octavianus had no standing at all before the law, and Brutus was in

ntonius, if his troops were mutinous and seditious, Antonius could be no true consul of the Roman People. On the other han

lack of personal energy as well as of social distinction. There was no Fabius now of consular rank, no Valerius, no Clau

as of social distinction. There was no Fabius now of consular rank, no Valerius, no Claudius. 2 Of the Cornelii, whose m

distinction. There was no Fabius now of consular rank, no Valerius, no Claudius. 2 Of the Cornelii, whose many branches

tocracy, the backbone of Sulla’s oligarchy, were sadly weakened, with no consular Metelli left alive, no Licinii or Junii.

oligarchy, were sadly weakened, with no consular Metelli left alive, no Licinii or Junii. Nor could the survivors of the

, departed with their kinsman and leader M. Junius Brutus, whether or no they had been implicated in the Ides of March. Li

4. 2 M. Valerius Messalla Rufus (cos. 53) was still alive, but took no part in politics. PageBook=>164 battle. Th

loyalties at variance or out of date: it is pretty clear that he had no use for any party. He knew about them all. The pe

new about them all. The pessimistic and clear-sighted Republican felt no confidence in a cause championed by Cicero, the p

or the Republic. Of the whereabouts of the Liberators there was still no certain knowledge at Rome at the end of the year.

ssimus’ (Ad Att. 9, 9, 3). PageBook=>167 Egypt in October, but no confirmation. Winter, however, while delaying new

ypt and Macedonia was soon to provide more than rumours. But there is no evidence of concerted design between the Liberato

ed before now imperiutm and the charge of a war to a man who had held no public office. But there were limits. The Senate

not choose its own members, or determine their relative standing. On no known practice or theory could the auctoritas of

oked by Cicero on January 1st for coolly disregarding the law were by no means adequate or unequivocal (Phil. 5, 7 ff.). F

but cling to Gallia Comata. 2 Deceptive and dangerous there could be no treating with Antonius, for Antonius was in effec

war was then proclaimed. It existed already. For the moment, however, no change in the military situation in the north. Th

persuaded to contribute their funds4 for the salvation of the State, no doubt. By the end of the year almost all Macedoni

ted proconsul of Macedonia, Illyricum and Achaia. Cicero had acquired no little facility in situations of this kind, loudl

patriotism and the higher legality. As for Cassius, there was as yet no authentic news of his successes: his usurpation i

ere thus forced to disown their compromising ally. It was Calenus and no other who proposed a motion declaring Dolabella a

her and presumably with Antonius. Lepidus at least seems to have made no secret of his agreement with Antonius: Antonius s

e victorious and disordered troops of Antonius and retrieved the day, no soldier in repute or in ambition, but equal to hi

d never claimed by Sulla or by Caesar. To a thoughtful patriot it was no occasion for rejoicing. ‘Think rather of the deso

d boasted in the Senate that the Caesarian veterans were on the wane, no match for the patriotic fervour of the levies of

with their host of seventeen legions, his ‘father’ Cicero would have no compunction about declaring the young man a publi

e for the Caesarians to repent and close their ranks. Octavianus made no move. He remained in the neighbourhood of Bononia

s knew what recruits were worth. 4 A lull followed. Antonius was in no hurry. He waited patiently for time, fear and pro

erior. Earlier in the year he had complained that the Senate sent him no instructions; nor could he have marched to Italy

aesarian generals for lack of heroism and lack of principle. They had no quarrel with Antonius; it was not they who had bu

principle were invoked to justify the shedding of Roman blood. It was no time-server or careerist, but the Stoic Favonius,

deprecated bitterly the influence of the veterans. 4 The veterans had no wish for war they had NotesPage=>166 1 Ad

on sapped the public counsels. No new consuls were elected. There was no leadership, no policy. A property-tax had been le

ublic counsels. No new consuls were elected. There was no leadership, no policy. A property-tax had been levied to meet th

e three Antonii; only practise a salutary severity, and there will be no more civil wars. 5 The plea of Brutus was plain a

heir marching on Rome will have convinced him at last that there was no room left for scruple or for legality. 1 Yet even

ed the true relation between the three leaders. After elaborate and no doubt necessary precautions for personal security

us, soon fell away to the cause of the Republic. 2 The others were of no importance. Lepidus himself, however, was to have

fied public law: they now abolished the private rights of citizenship no disproportionate revenge for men who had been dec

treason, when proconsul outlawed. For Octavianus there was none, and no merit beyond his name: ‘puer qui omnia nomini deb

ny another. That splendid name was now dishonoured. Caesar’s heir was no longer a rash youth but a chill and mature terror

history; and in later days, personal danger and loss of estates were no doubt invented or enhanced by many astute individ

iled when Caesar defeated Pompeius yet the following of Caesar was by no means homogeneous, and the Dictator stood above p

r pacific knights, anxiously abstaining from Roman politics. That was no defence. Varro was an old Pompeian, politically

and bought landed property. The Roman citizen in Italy was subject to no kind of taxation, direct or indirect. But now Rom

Italy had to pay the costs of civil war, in money and land. There was no other source for the Caesarians to draw upon, for

onal and even necessary reform: one year of the Triumvirate witnessed no fewer than sixty-seven. 1 The Triumvirs soon intr

ds and agents of equestrian rank, such as the banker C. Flavius, with no heart for war but faithful to the end. 4 At Athen

with a fleet for the Republic. 10 Most of the assassins of Caesar had no doubt left Italy at an early date; and the party

dependent command under Caesar: Allienus and Staius are soon heard of no more, but C. Calvisius Sabinus goes steadily forw

T. Peducaeus, M. Herennius the Picene and L. Vinicius, who have left no record of service to the rulers of Rome but, as s

ature from Horace’s witch Canidia, is exceedingly rare: Schulze gives no epigraphic examples of it. The origin of C. Sosiu

ar. Salvidienus, the earliest and greatest of his marshals, of origin no more distinguished than Agrippa, was his senior i

3 Appian, BC 5, 12, 46, cf. Dio 48, 2, 3. 4 Above, p. 189. There is no evidence of the whereabouts of P. Ventidius in 42

ius’ policy when he was consul. But with Caesar’s heir there could be no pact or peace. 1 When the Caesarian leaders unite

tablish a military dictatorship and inaugurate a class-war, there was no place left for hesitation. Under this conviction

ion of the proscriptions he knew where he stood. Brutus himself was no soldier by repute, no leader of men. But officers

ns he knew where he stood. Brutus himself was no soldier by repute, no leader of men. But officers and men knew and resp

ng or inventing a proposal of Caesar the Dictator, must be a province no longer but removed from political competition by

ngagements were duly recorded in writing, a necessary precaution, but no bar to dishonesty or dispute. Antonius now depart

riumviral colleague, and from the consul P. Servilius, Octavianus got no help. He was actively hindered by the other consu

33, 131; cf. ILS 886. 8 Velleius 2, 75. PageBook=>211 Still no sign came from the East. In Perusia the consul pr

fight. The caution of Plancus was too strong for them. 5 There was no mutual confidence in the counsels of the Antonian

for the illustrious year of Pollio had begun. Yet Octavianus was in no way at the end of his difficulties. He was master

e war in Etruria and the investment of Perusia, it may be that he had no cognizance when he arrived at Tyre in February of

mand a mass of legions: they were famished and unreliable, and he had no ships at all. Not merely did Antonius hold the se

oncordiae’ on October 12th (ILS 3784). PageBook=>218 Was there no end to the strife of citizen against citizen? No

e of citizen against citizen? No enemy in Italy, Marsian or Etruscan, no foreign foe had been able to destroy Rome. Her ow

a matter of fact, none other than he, Gallus, was the wonder-child:3 no evidence that Asconius believed him. The Virgilia

relevance, of Saloninus may be called into doubt; 5 further, there is no reason to imagine that Pollio expected a son of h

eason to imagine that Pollio expected a son of his to rule the world, no indication in the poem that the consul there invo

f all the marshals of the Revolution. Like Balbus, he had held as yet no senatorial office the wars had hardly left time f

nators, Caesarian, Republican or neutral. 2 For the present, however, no indication of such a change. Octavianus went to

s, held by his admiral C. Sosius. 3 But the Balkan peninsula was in no way the chief preoccupation of Antonius. Eastwa

32), 75 ff. Appian (BC 5, 75, 320) mentions the Dardani, but there is no record of any operations against them. The histor

ears, sacrificing ambition, interest and power. Of an appeal to arms, no thought in his mind the chance to suppress Caesar

of some consequence now or later. 1 There were others: yet there was no rapid or unanimous adhesion to the new master of

publican or two and certain of the assassins, for whom there could be no pardon from Caesar’s heir, no return to Rome. But

the assassins, for whom there could be no pardon from Caesar’s heir, no return to Rome. But the young Pompeius was despot

ge with Sex. Pompeius. 3 Livia was about to give birth to another son no obstacle, however, in high politics. The college

came to Brundisium but departed again without a conference, gave him no help. Antonius disapproved, and Sex. Pompeius for

Naples. The year 37 passed in thorough preparations. There was to be no mistake this time. Agrippa devised a grandiose pl

e of Caesar as his sole protection: it was enough. 4 The soldiers had no opinion of Lepidus and this was Caesar’s heir, in

ed the loss of honour by twenty-four years. The ruin of Lepidus had no doubt been carefully contrived, with little risk

he arrived there awaited him a welcome, sincere as never before. Many no doubt in all classes regretted the son of Pompeiu

to the spirit and profession of the Roman constitution there could be no rational hope any more. There was ordered governm

er to perform his share and subdue the Parthians, when there would be no excuse for delay to restore constitutional govern

235 his deputy in the Dictatorship, magister equitum. 1 After that, no word or hint of this eminent consular until his a

ce again until he becomes consul for the second time in 40 B.C., with no record of his activity, and governor of all Spain

to say nothing of aliens and freedmen, of which support Pompeius had no monopoly, but all the odium. 2 C. Proculeius, how

ian. 5 Calvisius was an Antonian in 44 B.C. (Phil. 3, 26). There is no evidence how soon he joined Octavianus. On his or

oon to become a glorious part of Roman history. In the Bellum Siculum no Metelli, Scipiones or Marcelli had revived their

h, Brutus 27. Nothing is known of his family or attachments: there is no evidence that he was related to Q. Cornificius.

or the novi homines splendid matches were now in prospect. By chance, no record is preserved of the partners of Taurus, Ca

himself from the tutelage of Antonius; and Octavia had given Antonius no son to inherit his leadership of the Caesarian pa

, as the Acta Triumphalia show (CIL 12, p. 50 and p. 77). About Gaul, no information. PageBook=>240 vigour and reso

valley of the Save and across the Julian Alps; and an enemy would win no support along or near the coast of Dalmatia. Thes

he admiral Q. Laronius became consul; the other six were commended by no known military service to the Triumvirs. Nor did

of that violent process, dominant in every order of society, were in no way disposed to share their new privileges or wel

ain symptoms of consolidation, political and social. There were to be no more proscriptions, no more expulsions of Italian

dation, political and social. There were to be no more proscriptions, no more expulsions of Italian gentry and farmers. Ma

y years, others, especially the Pompeians and Republicans, could show no member of consular age or standing. The patrician

e discerned one Claudius only, one Aemilius, partisans of Octavianus; no Fabii at all, of the patrician Cornelii two at th

t all, of the patrician Cornelii two at the most, perhaps only one; 2 no Valerii yet, but the Valerii were soon to provide

th arts and devices of subservience loathed by the Roman aristocracy: no honest man would care to surrender honour and ind

l war, languished and declined under the peace of the Triumvirs, with no use left in Senate or Forum, but only of service

such of them as deserved any distinction for peaceful studies earned no honour on that account from a military despotism.

he forefront of political speakers, and the spirited Caelius, were by no means the only exponents of this Attic tendency i

nerally conceded that Brutus’ choice of the plain and open manner was no affectation but the honest expression of his sent

r hold upon a generation that had lost leisure and illusions and took no pains to conceal their departure. But a direct, n

tionary period from the death of Sulla onwards. Though Sallustius was no blind partisan of Caesar, his aim, it may be infe

stice to the merits of Senate and People in earlier days. 2 There was no idealization in his account of a more recent peri

hey could set before them the heirs and the marshals of Caesar, owing no loyalty to Rome but feigned devotion to a created

ings who inherited the empire of Alexander. To discern which demanded no singular gift of perspicacity: it is the merit of

h propriety occupy his leisure in recording momentous events, himself no mean part of them, or in digesting the legal and

tocrat, though he might turn a verse with ease, or fill a volume, set no especial value. But it was now becoming evident t

government by conveying a political message, unobtrusive, but perhaps no less effective, than the spoken or written word o

r the Pact of Brundisium:1 how long he remained an Antonian, there is no evidence at all. Virgil, however, persevered wi

dy peasant-farmer. Varro, however, had described the land of Italy as no desolation but fruitful and productive beyond com

On the surface, consolidation after change and disturbance: beneath, no confidence yet or unity, but discord and disquiet

d, under the goad of fear, into a fanatical hatred. The Roman could no longer derive confidence from the language, habit

divinity, Caesar’s heir as Apollo, Antonius as Dionysus. 5 It was by no means evident how they were to operate a fusion

contrast with Antonius as with his earlier situation. Octavianus was no longer the terrorist of Perusia. Since then seven

Labienus broke through the Taurus with a Parthian army, encountering no resistance from Antipater the lord of Derbe and L

was not magnificent in extent of territories, for Cleopatra received no greater accession than did other dynasts ; 2 but

de. The faithless colleague sent seventy ships: of ships Antonius had no need. Octavia was instructed by her brother to br

ng with Octavianus: but he learned too late. Octavianus, however, was no more ready yet to exploit the affront to his fami

n 31 B.C. (Dio 51, 7, 3), was perhaps appointed by Antonius. There is no evidence of any provincial commands held by L. Ca

Antonius, who journeyed from Rome to the conference of Tarentum. 6 Of no note in the arts of peace were certain military m

ren vigour and talent, not ancestral imagines and dead consuls. Hence no little doubt whether the motley party of Antonius

not be recovered: the resplendent donations, whatever they were, made no difference at all to provincial administration in

to judge by Per. 131) fully exploited this attractive theme. They had no reason to spare Antonius. PageBook=>271 co

nce as well as in political mythology. Of the facts, there is and was no authentic record; even if there were, it would be

’, though fertile with twin offspring, lapsed after a winter, leaving no political consequences. By 33 B.C., however, the

nt attempts to augment her kingdom at the expense of Judaea. There is no sign of infatuation here if infatuation there was

as but her dupe and her agent. Of the ability of Cleopatra there is no doubt: her importance in history, apart from lite

t most easily to be worked and swayed. Years before, Cleopatra was of no moment whatsoever in the policy of Caesar the Dic

rs were to expire. The rivals manoeuvred for position: of compromise, no act or thought. Octavianus moved first. Early in

triumviral powers had come to an end. 6 He was not dismayed: he took no NotesPage=>277 1 For the details, K. Scott

harges in the dispute of the dynasts, whether legal or personal, were no novelty to a generation that could recall the mis

was in a very difficult position. The secession of avowed enemies by no means left a Senate unreservedly and reliably loy

for peace. For war his prestige and his power were enormous. It is in no way evident that the mishap in Media had ruined h

lent of a declaration of war; and war would have ensued, Cleopatra or no Cleopatra. But the Queen was there: Antonius stoo

Caesarian Plancus, each with a following of his own. Between them was no confidence, but bitter enmity, causing a feud wit

τι αὐτῷἐκεῖνʋι ἤ καὶ τῇ Kλεʋoάτρᾳ τι άχθεσθέντεϛ (50, 3,2). Velleius, no safe guide about Plancus at any time, alleges tha

ancus. Complete silence envelops the discreet Cocceii; and there is no sign when Atratinus and Fonteius changed sides. A

that he had bestowed upon his paramour the whole library of Pergamum, no less than two hundred thousand volumes. 1 The loy

at Antonius was the victim of sorcery. 6 Antonius for his part made no move yet. Not merely because Octavianus had picke

tion. Of the manner in which the measure was carried out there stands no record at all. The oath of allegiance was perhaps

Roman name, the toga and eternal Vesta! 1 But Horace, himself perhaps no son of Italian stock, was conveniently oblivious

, was conveniently oblivious of recent Italian history. The Marsi had no reason at all to be passionately attached to Roma

uld have been difficult enough to enlist Italian sentiment. Italy had no quarrel with Antonius; as for despotism, the thre

i credere fortunae: stat magni nominis umbra. 2 The younger dynast, no longer owing everything to the name of Caesar, po

each of valid conjecture. 3 Of the Roman State, of Senate and People, no word. The oath of allegiance bound followers to a

us Sabinus or Statilius Taurus; and it may fairly be conjectured that no opposition confronted Maecenas at Arretium, where

om the colony of Cales in Campania. 2 Less eminent partisans might be no less effective. The Paelignian town of Sulmo had

g to secure ratification for his ordering of the East, was in himself no menace to the Empire, but a future ruler who coul

exponents of the national unity and the crusade against the East were no doubt to be found in the order of Roman knights a

ism was already there and war inevitable. In a restoration of liberty no man could believe any more. Yet if the coming str

y knew it, and they knew the price of peace and survival. There was no choice : the Caesarian leader would tolerate no n

survival. There was no choice : the Caesarian leader would tolerate no neutrality in the national struggle. One man, how

acious propaganda revolted both his honesty and his intellect: he had no illusions about Octavianus and his friends in the

and new, about Plancus, or about Agrippa. It is to be regretted that no history preserves the opinions of Pollio concerni

Gallus and the ancestors of Cn. Julius Agricola, will have displayed no hesitation. The native population remained tranqu

Maecenas controlled Rome and Italy, invested with supreme power, but no title. 6 There must be no risks, no danger of an

and Italy, invested with supreme power, but no title. 6 There must be no risks, no danger of an Antonian rising in Italy i

invested with supreme power, but no title. 6 There must be no risks, no danger of an Antonian rising in Italy in defence

sks, no danger of an Antonian rising in Italy in defence of Libertas, no second War of Perusia. The surest guarantee provi

five hundred citizens with the knight’s census, a number surpassed by no town of Italy save Patavium (Strabo, p. 169). For

ght appear. Antonius now had to stand beside Cleopatra—there could be no turning back. Patrae at the mouth of the Gulf of

hirty. The new recruits were inferior to Italians, it is true, but by no means contemptible if they came from the virile a

assed, with operations by land and sea of which history has preserved no adequate record. Antonius’ admiral Sosius was def

ed, cf. Dio 50, 13, 8; Velleius 2, 84, 2). 2 Dio 51, 4, 3. There is no indication of the date of his desertion. He had p

, Aegyptia coniunx. 1 The victory was final and complete. There was no haste to pursue the fugitives to Egypt. Octavianu

3 Warfare would provide occupation for some of his legions. Though no serious outbreak had disturbed the provinces, the

Some at least of the triumphs soon to be held by Caesarian marshals ( no fewer than six in 28-26 B.C.) were fairly earned.

guilt of civil war. 3 Likewise did his heir, when murder could serve no useful purpose : he even claimed that after his v

eopatra presented a more delicate problem. ‘A multitude of Caesars is no good thing. ’3 That just observation sealed the f

away during the War of Actium. Octavianus was not incommoded: he took no steps to recover that region, but invoked and mai

arms—or even of diplomacy. Of an invasion of Asia and Syria there was no danger to be apprehended, save when civil war loo

ve when civil war loosened the fabric of Roman rule. There were to be no more civil wars. So much for the East. It was n

f peace by a Roman statesman might attest a victory, but it portended no slackening of martial effort. The next generation

4, 51, 221) records that he became governor of Syria. About the date, no evidence. The period 29–27 B.C. is attractive, bu

r own ambition, inadequacy or dishonesty. Sulla established order but no reconciliation in Rome and Italy. Pompeius destro

ad put off the task, the Triumvirs had not even begun. The duty could no longer be evaded on the plea of wars abroad or fa

and venerable relic, intact after the passage of four centuries, was no doubt invoked to demonstrate that Crassus had no

four centuries, was no doubt invoked to demonstrate that Crassus had no valid claim to the spolia opima because he was no

ambitious, succumbed to imprudence or the calumny of his enemies, who no doubt were numerous. Octavianus disowned him, bre

e been recalled from Egypt in 28 B.C. With the proconsul of Macedonia no link is known, save that each was once a partisan

s rather than noble, and praetorian rather than consular in rank; and no imperatorial salutations, no triumphs, if it coul

torian rather than consular in rank; and no imperatorial salutations, no triumphs, if it could be helped. The nobilis and

tion was only a step to greater consolidation of power. And of power, no surrender. Only words and forms were changed, and

carried imperium maius over the provinces of the Senate. Which is by no means necessary, cf. W. Kolbe, in the volume Aus

(o. c, 120 ff.). That Augustus exercised such a supervision there is no doubt—but in virtue of his auctoritas. Augustus’

own armies lay at a distance, disposed on the periphery of the Empire— no threat, it might seem, to a free constitution, bu

ry; and Africa nourished her proverbial wars. Special commands were no novelty, no scandal. The strictest champion of co

ca nourished her proverbial wars. Special commands were no novelty, no scandal. The strictest champion of constitutional

after year without a break. The supreme magistracy, though purporting no longer to convey enhanced powers, as after the en

Cicero, Phil, 11, 17, cf. 28. 2 Augustus claimed to have exercised no more potestas than any of his colleagues in magis

armonious development. 2 Augustus himself, so he asserted, accepted no magistracy that ran contrary to the ‘mos maiorum’

n constitution would serve his purpose well enough. It is, therefore, no paradox to discover in the Principate of Augustus

mpo, proice tela manu, sanguis meus! 6 Save for that veiled rebuke, no word of Caesar in all the epic record of Rome’s g

the victory itself, on quieter reflection an uncomfortable matter, is no longer fervently advertised. A purified Pompeiu

l activity of Cicero in the last year of his life. The smooth Plancus no doubt acquiesced, adding his voice to the chorus.

ated vocabulary of Roman political literature, much of it, indeed, in no way peculiar to Cicero: the speeches of his peers

have been discovered? A champion of the ‘higher legality’ should find no quarrel with a rigid law of high treason. It is

man in the Empire, ruling Egypt as a king and giving account of it to no man; he coined in gold and silver in the province

cent reticence about the gap between fact and theory. It was evident: no profit but only danger from talking about it. The

d be grossly exaggerated by the adulatory or the uncritical. Such was no doubt the opinion of the suspicious Tacitus, ever

Terentius Varro Murena. No doubt about any of these men, or at least no candidate hostile to the Princeps. Taurus stood s

salpine, Spain and Syria, with some twenty legions. The Cisalpina was no longer a province. Apart from that, Augustus’ por

nder their own auspices and had celebrated triumphs would consider it no great honour to serve as legates. The Triumvirate

men of this rank—and after the Pact of Brundisium Rome had witnessed no fewer than ten triumphs of proconsuls, Caesarian

rder. The position of the Princeps and his restored Republic was by no means as secure and unequivocal as official acts

f consular and praetorian provinces gradually developed; and it is by no means certain that it held good for the public pr

were to be firmly held by men whom he could trust. Northern Italy was no longer a province, but the Alpine lands, restless

by generals operating in northern Italy in this period is a matter of no little difficulty. 5 In Spain C. Antistius Vetu

Macedonia and Africa, in public law merely a matter for the lot, was no less happy and inspired than if they were legates

ia c. 24-23 B.C. (Dio 54, 3, 2—misdated to 22 b.c.). 4 For example, no previous military service of the novi homines C.

vine parent. 1 The design of conquering either Britain or Parthia had no place in the mind of Augustus. Passing through th

eius 2, 78, 3; Dio 48, 42, 1 ff. 3 Apart from the Acta Triumphalia, no record of any fighting save when Taurus was there

He had been away about three years: Rome was politically silent, with no voice or testimony, hoping and fearing in secret.

rincipate of Augustus. 3 From a constitutional crisis, in itself of no great moment, arose grave consequences for the Ca

acedonia. A man of notorious and unbridled freedom of speech, he took no pains to conceal his opinion of the exercise of a

chieved the conquest of Spain (in 26 and 25 B.C.), and that there was no trouble ever after ’postea etiam latrociniis vaca

dily worse, passing into a dangerous illness. Close to death, he gave no indication of his last intentions he merely hande

337 1 Cf. M. Reinhold, Marcus Agrippa (1933), 167 ff. Dio mentions no grant of imperium to Agrippa. That Agrippa at thi

tus, made consul with Cicero’s bibulous son in the year after Actium: no pretence of Republic then. Nor was the consulate

ain provinces to proconsuls: they were merely Narbonensis and Cyprus, no great loss to Gaul and Syria. 1 There had been su

operations in Gaul and in the Alpine lands, as well as in Spain,2 but no serious warfare in the senatorial provinces. But

social and moral programme which he was held to have inspired. He was no puppet: but the deeds for which he secured the cr

. Octavia had been employed in her brother’s interest before and knew no policy but his. She had a son, C. Marcellus. On h

yielding powers of discretion to Agrippa and to the consul, there was no word of Marcellus. When Augustus recovered, he of

l. Between the Princeps’ two steadfast allies of early days there was no love lost. The men of the Revolution can scarcely

Life with her was not easy. 4 An added complication was Augustus, by no means insensible, it was rumoured, to those notor

is described as a mild but opprobrious form of banishment. 7 There is no truth in this fancy a political suspect is not pl

ed the constitutional façade of the New Republic men like Agrippa had no great reverence for forms and names. It went be

ture was stubborn and domineering. He would yield to Augustus, but to no other man, and to Augustus not always with good g

0). PageBook=>346 To the Principate of Augustus there could be no hereditary succession, for two reasons, the one j

nd advancement. Of this imposing total, so Augustus proudly affirmed, no fewer than eighty-three either had already held t

of a revolutionary age. Obscurity of birth or provincial origin was no bar. Of the great plebeian marshals a number had

in money. 4 Soldiers dismissed in the years 7-2 B.C. received in all no less than four hundred million sesterces. 5 The a

a sterner discipline than civil wars had tolerated. 2 But this meant no neglect. Augustus remembered, rewarded and promot

cial hierarchy of the Republic he could rise to the centurionate, but no higher. After service, it is true, he might be in

census, and hence eligible for equestrian posts; 5 further, it is by no means unlikely that sons of equestrian families f

financial status of knights (which was not difficult): but there was no regular promotion, in the army itself, from the c

s will that he suffered severe financial losses during the Civil Wars no doubt a conventional assertion, not restricted to

ilitum’. 6 Horace himself was only one generation better. Here again, no return to Republican prejudices of birth. In the

my, in finance and in administration is gradually built up, in itself no sudden novelty, but deriving from common practice

, legates and quaestors, permitted to be acknowledged. Centurions had no monopoly of long service certain knights, active

for his agent and chief officer of intendance and supply a knight of no small consequence, the praefectus fabrum. The n

s highly respectable. Some said that Vitellius’ father was a freedman no doubt he had many enemies. L. Annaeus Seneca, a w

‘municipalis adulter’. 2 Seianus’ father, Seius Strabo, may have been no more than a knight in standing, a citizen of Vols

l ambition. 4 In itself, the promotion of knights to the Senate was no novelty, for it is evident that the Senate after

d, like Lanuvium, provide senators for Rome there are remote towns of no note before or barely named, like Aletrium in the

y were the first senators of their families, sometimes the last, with no prospect of the consulate but safe votes for the

s a knight’s son from the colony of Cales. P. Sulpicius Quirinius had no connexion with the ancient and patrician house of

Verona, Patavium, Brixia, Pola and Concordia. 2 Excellent persons, no doubt, and well endowed with material goods. But

gustus gave the latus clavus to a promising young Ovidius. This was no commercial upstart, no military careerist rising

lavus to a promising young Ovidius. This was no commercial upstart, no military careerist rising in social status throug

viedis L.’ (from Corfinium, R. S. Conway, The Italic Dialects 1, 246, no . 225). 4 ILS 932: ‘is primus omnium Paelign. se

med to represent the Roman People, for it was a ruling aristocracy by no means narrow and exclusive. The generous policy o

less Republican and less ‘democratic’, for eligibility to office was no longer universal, but was determined by the posse

oung nobiles to his person, to his family and to the new system, with no little success. But there must be no going back u

mily and to the new system, with no little success. But there must be no going back upon his earlier supporters the plebs,

in the first years masked or palliated some of its maladies at least no juvenile consuls are attested for some time. None

ls. Nor will it be forgotten that Taurus was there all the time, with no official standing. 1 Rome was glad when Augustu

domination of the Triumvirs had created numerous consuls, in 33 B.C. no fewer than eight, with masses of novi homines pro

es against five nobles. 3 The restored Republic, it is evident, meant no restoration of the nobiles, the proportion on the

nt no restoration of the nobiles, the proportion on the Fasti showing no great change from the Triumviral period. After

o have restored the Free State. That was left to Augustus’ successor, no doubt in virtue of his final instructions. 1 The

riguer, the loquacious Lollius Palicanus. 3 Service in war might find no higher reward than the praetorship, unless aided

e, or at least unpopular, like Titius, Tarius and Quirinius. That was no bar. Others were not merely his allies, bound by

by playing dice with M. Vinicius and P. Silius. 2 Without his favour, no novus homo could have reached the consulate. Of t

tageous and satisfactory Claudian connexion. Livia, however, gave him no children. But Julia, his daughter by Scribonia, w

ssalla Barbatus Appianus. 3 These were the closest in blood, but by no means the only near relatives of the Princeps. C.

-sister: her sons were Sex. Appuleius and M. Appuleius, both consuls, no doubt at an early age. The schemes devised by A

ation of family alliances were formidable and fantastic. He neglected no relative, however obscure, however distant, no ti

antastic. He neglected no relative, however obscure, however distant, no tie whatever of marriage or of friendship retaine

their families. In the year A.D. 4 he thus augmented the census of no fewer than eighty men. 1 Upon his own adherents

and it was C. Ateius Capito who then interpreted the Sibylline oracle no doubt to justify the date chosen by the governmen

ical dynasts of the previous age disposed of provincial commands need no recapitulation. Their manoeuvres were seldom frus

provinces. The precise manner of its working is unknown, the results no doubt satisfactory. Moreover, the choice of a pro

tever the character of the Roman constitution: his influence, checked no doubt for a long time by Augustus, may be detecte

ncient dignity. XXVI. THE GOVERNMENT PageBook=>387 THOUGH by no means as corrupt and inefficient as might hastily

ember of 43 B.C. there were only seventeen consulars alive, mostly of no consequence. By the year of Pollio, at the time o

hority of Agrippa, Maecenas and Livia, who ruled Rome in secret, knew no name or definition and needed none. The precautio

verybody had known about it. After the first settlement Augustus in no way relaxed his control of the armies, holding th

dow was consigned to Agrippa. As Maecenas his enemy put it, there was no choice: Augustus must make Agrippa his son-in-law

d to remove causes of friction and consolidate an alliance perhaps by no means as loyal and unequivocal as the Roman Peopl

his powers, cf. M. Reinhold, Marcus Agrippa (1933), 98 ff. Whether or no he should be called co-regent is a question of te

kward, lacking above all in lateral communications there was (and is) no way along the littoral of the Adriatic. The Augus

uered the whole of Bosnia and the Save valley down to Belgrade (which no ancient source asserts) and that the operations o

16 B.C. and among the Pannonians in 14 B.C. (54, 20, 3; 24, 3), with no mention of M. Vinicius here or under 13 B.C. (54,

the province or refrained from having a proconsul appointed. There is no record of the title of M. Lollius. 2 Dio 54, 28

mage. Agrippa was gone, Taurus perhaps was dead by now; and Maecenas, no longer a power in politics, had a short time to l

I, I f. 2 Odes 4, 9. 3 For example, Piso and Ahenobarbus receive no ode from Horace. PageBook=>393 Above all,

thern boundaries King Amyntas had lost his life; and though there was no permanent establishment of Roman troops, the vete

s of consular proconsuls. The Senate retained Africa, a province of no little importance from its constant and arduous w

emained there from the last years of Augustus onwards; 1 and although no proconsul after Balbus triumphed, the governors,

these, five lay along the northern frontier of the Empire, embracing no fewer than fifteen legions. The contrast with the

oricum and Judaea. PageBook=>395 To the Senate he had restored no military territories, but only, from time to time

ir twenties. Patronage was justified in its results and patronage was no new thing at Rome. Under the Republic the comma

inly had, and Varro, whom posterity knows as a learned antiquary, was no doubt a competent administrator. In this matter

a competent administrator. In this matter the Principate introduced no startling novelties. As before, senior centurions

or the praetorship, the senator might command a legion this post was no innovation, but the stabilization of a practice c

ents. A great school of admirals had also been created. After Actium, no place for them. 1 But the lesson was not lost. Au

st. Augustus perpetuated the premium on specialization, for political no less than for military reasons: elderly novi homi

Many important military operations are barely known, other campaigns no doubt have lapsed into oblivion. No complete re

d legate, governing the province in absentia; and there may have been no separate legate for Syria during the period of hi

t be room for another legate between Titius and Sentius, but there is no point in inserting one. 3 Dio 54, 20, 4 ff.; Ve

iers, their service expired, were dismissed in the years 7-2 B.C. But no ground was lost during the decade when Tiberius w

have been transferred to the legate of Moesia. 5 However that may be, no consulars can be established in this period, only

s and Vinicius, all with long careers of useful service. Of the rest, no fewer than five were related in some way to the f

uited and trained. 5 That could not go on. After 19 B.C. there were no more triumphs of senators; and in any case August

n People at home and abroad. Plebs and army, provinces and kings were no longer in the clientela of individual politicians

Suetonius, Divus Claudius 25, 1. PageBook=>405 For the senator no hope or monument of fame was left. Italy by the V

nd wide regions in his clientela. 2 Descendants of Pompeius survived: no chance that they would be allowed to hold high co

ον Moυvατίoυ. 4 IGRR IV, 244 (Ilium). 5 Dio 53, 15, 4 f. There is no evidence, however, about the date of this innovat

esumably, M. Lollius c. 19–18 B.C. (Dio 54, 20, 3) in Macedonia; and, no doubt, many others. The language in which the cit

ransactions. The era of cabinet government has set in. The Senate was no longer a sovran body, but an organ that advertise

of the government; senatorial rank and the tenure of high office were no longer an end in themselves but the qualification

- constitutional forces as the auctoritas of senior statesmen holding no public office, the intrigues of ladies at the cen

in the company of his intimates. Octavianus inherited the policy and no little part of the personnel, for the names of Ba

; and the committee seems subsequently to have lapsed. 3 The Senate no less than the assembly of the sovran people was a

mental policy. That was the work of other bodies, which kept and left no written records. Their existence, their character

of counsellors to the Princeps or any constitutional organ. There was no cabinet but a series of cabinets, the choice of m

stius who procured the removal of Agrippa Postumus. 1 History records no such acts of public service to the credit of P. V

. There must be financial experts lurking somewhere. Moreover, it was no doubt only the residue of the revenues from his o

ime. 8 Senators might preside over the treasury, but the Senate had no control of financial policy, no exact knowledge o

over the treasury, but the Senate had no control of financial policy, no exact knowledge of the budget of Empire. The rati

Julius Aquila and M. Magius Maximus. These persons, it is true, have no known history among the equestrian councillors of

dissemination of opinion favourable to the government, Maecenas knew no peer and left no successor. In the same year as M

opinion favourable to the government, Maecenas knew no peer and left no successor. In the same year as Maecenas, Horace d

soon gained experience in the frontier provinces, the consulate, and, no doubt, a place in councils of State. Silius had c

ntes fuissent’ (ib. 4). PageBook=>414 The historian might with no less propriety have turned his talents to the elu

ssess and facts that he could never discover. Dio was well aware that no authentic record of such momentous transactions w

and orderly fashion, so that the transmission of power appeared to be no different from its first legitimation, namely, a

the governor of Upper Germany. 1 Trajan himself in his lifetime gave no unequivocal indication of his ultimate intentions

s nature was ill matched with the gay elegance of Julia to call it by no more revealing name. It was the duty and the habi

was now to depart from Rome and set in order the affairs of the East ( no doubt with a special imperium). While Tiberius go

last six years, Tiberius had hardly been seen in Rome; and there was no urgent need of him in the East. Augustus wished t

t and exorbitant power, ‘regnum’ or ‘dominatio’ as it was called, was no new thing in the history of Rome or in the annals

vate intrigue. As the family circle of Augustus at one time comprised no fewer than three pairs of women bearing the names

an that either prudence or consummate guile: his name finds record in no political transactions, intrigues or conspiracies

&c). PageBook=>423 So Livia worked for power. But it is by no means certain that Silvanus was popular with Tibe

4 The last consular Marcellus is Aeserninus (22 B.C.), a person of no great note who had been a partisan of Caesar the

erhaps, a following of his own. 2 Like the Cornelii Lentuli, Piso was no enemy of Tiberius. There were other nobles with i

ted and worked for her family, patient and unobtrusive. There must be no open evidence of discord in the syndicate of gove

hter of the Princeps. Yet it was not of Livia’s doing, and it brought no immediate benefit to her son. The whole episode i

He was also kin to the Libones (Tacitus, Ann. 2, 30): precisely how, no evidence. 6 Above, p. 400 f. PageBook=>426

n suspected, bearing heavily on the Julii who supplanted her son. But no ancient testimony makes this easy guess and incri

tus might think that he knew his Tiberius. Still, he preferred to run no risks. The disgrace of Julia would abolish the on

e to display the heir apparent to provinces and armies which had seen no member of the syndicate of government since Agrip

1 Suetonius, Tib. 12 f.; Velleius 2, 101 f.; Dio 55, 10, 17 ff. (with no word of Lollius). For events in the East, cf. J.

it was alleged that he had taken bribes from eastern kings3 in itself no grave misdemeanour. The charges of rapacity and a

he position of Tiberius improved, though his political prospects grew no brighter. His spirit appears to have been broke

’ return, the Claudian was not restored to his dignitas. 2 No honour, no command in war awaited him, but a dreary and prec

assentatione alentium. ’ 5 ILS 140. PageBook=>431 There was no choice now. Augustus adopted Tiberius. The words

sentiments of Senate and People when the Claudian returned to power, no testimony exists. 2 In his own order and class, i

testimony exists. 2 In his own order and class, it will be presumed, no lack of open joy and welcome, to dissemble the ru

to visit Agrippa Postumus in secret. 3 More instructive, perhaps, if no more authentic, was the report of one of his late

e Balkans after their praetorships; 2 they received the consulate but no consular military province. Silius’ two brothers

of a war in Africa, a somnolent and lazy person to outward view, but no less trusted by Tiberius than the excellent Piso.

ne the less, it must be demonstrated and admitted that there could be no division of the supreme power. NotesPage=>43

cribes the execution of Agrippa. The arbitrary removal of a rival was no less essential to the Principate than the public

ire without the virtues that had won it? 4 A well-ordered state has no need of great men, and no room for them. The last

at had won it? 4 A well-ordered state has no need of great men, and no room for them. The last century of the Free State

e the historian Tacitus, would have none of them; and so they receive no praise from the poets. 1 Pompeius was no better,

of them; and so they receive no praise from the poets. 1 Pompeius was no better, though he has the advantage over Caesar i

breeding and sentiment. The Roman matron could claim that she needed no written law to guide her, no judge to correct:

Roman matron could claim that she needed no written law to guide her, no judge to correct: mi natura dedit leges a sangu

mpt to arrest a declining birth-rate. 5 The aim of the new code was no less than this, to bring the family under the pro

edies and incomplete redress, into a crime. The wife, it is true, had no more rights than before. But the husband, after d

forbidden to senators, was condoned in others for it was better than no marriage. The Roman People was to contemplate and

that he should in recent history the dignity of pontifex maximus, in no way the reward of merit, was merely a prize in th

Rome. No fewer than eighty-two required his attention, so he claimed, no doubt with exaggeration,5 passing over the consid

the national spirit of Rome was a reaction against Hellas, there was no harm, but every advantage, in invoking the better

ns were encouraged to regard themselves as a tough and martial people no pomp of monarchs here or lies of Greek diplomats,

f. 6 Georgics 2, 532 ff., cf. 167 ff. PageBook=>451 It is by no means certain what class of cultivator the Georgi

nce the primacy over pecuniary profit. If the growing of corn brought no money to the peasant, if his life was stern and l

ashioned moralist might rejoice. Let foreign trade decline it brought no good, but only an import of superfluous luxury an

property. Large estates grew larger. Prosperity might produce qualms no less than did adversity. Horace, in whom the horr

sor; and that shaggy Cato himself, of peasant stock and a farmer, was no grower of cereals but a shrewd and wealthy expone

s of cultivation. As in politics, so in economic life, there could be no reaction. None was intended. No thought of mulcti

iled to Rome: it might be added that the other was a Picene. That was no palliation. These men before all others should ha

came over the Roman aristocracy was evident to the historian Tacitus; no less evident that it was slow in operation and du

t avid and ruthless. 2 The greatness of an imperial people derives in no small measure from the unconscious suppression of

ression of awkward truth. When Rome could admit with safety, or could no longer disguise, the decline of Italy and the tra

was not available. Recruits from Italy south of the Apennines were by no means abundant. On the other hand, northern or pr

ps were pressed into service in the legions of the Roman People. 1 On no interpretation could these aliens pass for Italia

st in Roman religion and other national antiquities. As yet, however, no systematic exploitation of literature on the gran

for the plebeian military men promoted under the New State, there is no evidence that they were interested in fostering l

ullus and Lucretius. Those free and passionate individuals could find no place or favour in the civic and disciplined acad

ur but did not impair the sceptical realism of his character there is no warrant for loose talk about conversion to Stoici

high mission, Aeneas is sober, steadfast and tenacious: there can be no respite for him, no repose, no union of heart and

s is sober, steadfast and tenacious: there can be no respite for him, no repose, no union of heart and policy with an alie

steadfast and tenacious: there can be no respite for him, no repose, no union of heart and policy with an alien queen. It

ution but sombre and a little weary. The poem is not an allegory; but no contemporary could fail to detect in Aeneas a for

ord of recent and contemporary history had been preserved, they would no doubt set forth the ‘lessons of history’ in a viv

vivid and convincing form. An excellent source soon became available, no less than the biographical memoir in which the Pr

c rather than partisan. The North, unlike so many parts of Italy, had no history of its own, with memories of ancient inde

m his love and lover’s melancholy to celebrate with fervour, and with no small air of conviction, the War of Actium, or to

ustus’ granddaughter Julia (A.D. 8) provided the excuse. There can be no question of any active complicity on the part of

reproduced in Rome and over all the world. It is true that he caused no fewer than eighty silver statues in the city to b

e homage they enjoyed. Caesar accepted honours from whomsoever voted, no doubt in the spirit in which they were granted: p

and for the dynasty he monopolized every form and sign of allegiance; no proconsul of Rome ever again is honoured in the t

altars but not temples, as at Tarraco and at Narbo. There was as yet no provincial cult in these regions, for the colonie

was a monarchy guaranteed its ready acceptance. The lower classes had no voice in government, no place in history. In town

d its ready acceptance. The lower classes had no voice in government, no place in history. In town or country there was po

were, is another question. The rule of Rome in the Empire represented no miraculous conversion from a brutal and corrupt R

vinces were contented enough, for they had known worse, and could see no prospect of a successful war for liberty against

e populace might still assert for itself the right of free speech, as no order else in the New State. They demonstrated ag

throw the New State that had been built up at their expense. They had no illusions about it and they remembered Philippi,

t;480 That might be doubted. The person and habits of Augustus were no less detestable than his rule. Of his morals, the

the traditional stories of variegated vice were freely circulated and no doubt widely believed: they belong to a category

alous to the ridiculous, it will be observed that the Princeps was by no means as majestic and martial in appearance as hi

ould not stand the sun, even in winter, in which season he would wear no fewer than four under-shirts, not to mention putt

emency became a commodity widely advertised by his successors, but by no means widely distributed. Augustus alleged that i

tributed. Augustus alleged that in the Civil Wars he had put to death no citizen of his enemies’ armies who had asked that

prosecution and hounding to death of the assassins of Caesar. It was no doubt recalled that Caesar’s heir had been willin

essary to say much about that. Less advertised by the government, but no less distasteful to the nobiles, were the domesti

ugustus it was inexpedient to suppress any activity that could do him no harm. Tiberius was alarmed at the frequency of li

opportunity in the Curia or in the law courts to utter sentiments of no little frankness and vigour. PageNotes. 481 1

honour. 6 Of the pre-eminence of Labeo in legal scholarship there was no doubt: he spent one half of the year instructing

as creative. Sallustius had died at his task, carrying his Historiae no farther than the year 67 B.C. Pollio, however, se

ped away shams and revealed the naked realities of politics. It is in no way surprising that Pollio, like Stendhal, became

recorded by Quintilian, criticized Livy for ‘Patavinitas’. 3 It is by no means certain that Quintilian himself understood

ot history only, but poetry and eloquence also, now that Libertas was no more. The Principate inherited genius from the Tr

and Livy from the public libraries. 3 The rule of Caligula brought no freedom, no benefit to history: it merely poisone

om the public libraries. 3 The rule of Caligula brought no freedom, no benefit to history: it merely poisoned the source

eir decadence. The nobiles have not spoken themselves. They have left no personal and authentic record to show what they t

olid and conspicuous monument of military despotism. For the nobiles, no more triumphs after war, no more roads, temples a

t of military despotism. For the nobiles, no more triumphs after war, no more roads, temples and towns named in their hono

ble marriage alliances and lasted into the reign of Augustus produced no more consuls after that time. That was not all.

cus lived on in dull indolence, merely praetorian in rank and leaving no heir; 4 his spirited sister chose to perish with

Africa and Sicily, found that obscurity and commercial pursuits were no protection from the doom of an illustrious name.

ompeius and the dominant faction of the nobilitas. But the Julii left no direct heir, and the grandnephew of the Dictator,

ter generations of the Julii and Claudii. Livia had given her husband no children but the Claudii ruled. And in the end, b

families at first escaped alliance with the ruling dynasty, providing no victims at all for the domestic dramas of Augustu

ssed for alleged conspiracy against Caligula, and the family can show no consuls in any branch after Nero. 5 The Calpurnii

uccessful novi homines of the Revolution and of the New State were by no means exempt from the infertility or the ill fort

. The Caesarian partisans Vatinius, Trebonius, Hirtius and Pansa left no consular descendants, any more than had Pompeius’

uired dignity. The names of Ventidius and Canidius belong to history: no offspring of theirs could hope to receive the con

ne Cornelius Balbus and of Sosius, Antonius’ admiral. 2 M. Titius had no known progeny from his alliance with the patricia

ied Sex. Nonius Quinctilianus, cos. A.D.8 (ILS 934). 3 For example, no issue is known of T. Peducaeus (cos. suff. 35 B.C

7 B.C.), and M. Herennius (cos. 34 B.C.) each had a consular son, but no further descendants. 4 Seneca, De clem. 1, 15.

us, a military man, left a daughter. 1 Quirinius, however, could show no children for two marriages with daughters of the

nnexion with the Pompeii. 3 Association with the reigning dynasty was no less dangerous. Like the nobiles, the new consula

na. 5 The second and third wives of Nero bore the now historic but by no means antique names of Poppaea Sabina and Statili

y and peaceful M. Cocceius Nerva was elevated to the purple. He had no children one of the reasons, no doubt, for the ch

va was elevated to the purple. He had no children one of the reasons, no doubt, for the choice. There were others: at this

y an Aelius Lamia by birth, of which house after the consul of A.D. 3 no direct descendants are known. 8 Juvenal speaks

os. suff. 39. 2 The origin of Burrus is revealed by ILS 1321. It is no accident that the governors of Lower Germany earl

ey should have been right, for Galba was only the façade of a man, in no way answering to his name or his reputation. 4 Bu

that depressed and perverted the morale of the aristocracy. There was no field left them now for action or even for displa

hed from such spectacles. The present was ominous, the future offered no consolation. The forces of revolution, though con

story of the civil wars that his own generation had witnessed. He had no illusions about the contestants or the victors in

um virorum facta moresque’. 4 Therein lay the tragedy the Empire gave no scope for the display of civic virtue at home and

and abroad, for it sought to abolish war and politics. There could be no great men any more: the aristocracy was degraded

dazzle, but it cannot blind, the critical eye. Otherwise there can be no history of these times deserving the name, but on

us was a political scapegoat, while Quirinius, Titius and Tarius left no consular sons as objects of fear or flattery. I

ustus would have illumined history with a constellation of characters no less vivid and detestable. The novus homo, avid a

the race for wealth and power. The nobilis, less obtrusive, might be no better. After a social revolution the primacy of

hreatened extinction in the revolutionary age, learned from adversity no lesson save the belief that poverty was the extre

that supported Pompeius. The patrician Lentuli were numerous, but by no means talented in proportion. The fact that L. Do

the Sulpicii, Ser. Galba and his ugly hunchback father could display no real talent, but owed advancement to snobbery and

the cool shade of Tibur Plancus could take his ease and reflect with no little complacency that throughout his campaigns,

yria (‘quam pauper divitem ingressus dives pauperem reliquit’), is of no independent value whatever. Varus certainly behav

a and Pollio, the consular patrons of Augustan literature, themselves no mean part of it. The Roman patrician and the Ital

of hereditary monarchy. 5 Under the new order, the Commonwealth was no longer to be a playground for politicians, but in

ions to shed its blood for ambitious generals or spurious principles, no longer were the peaceful men of property to be dr

erary and sentimental conventions. Like Sallustius and Pollio, he had no illusions about the Republic. The root of the tro

rew libertas by force of arms and established dominatio. Pompeius was no better. After that, only a contest for supreme po

commonwealths, lacking that ‘licence which fools call liberty’, left no record in the annals of eloquence. 5 Not so Athen

ae cupido cum imperii magnitudine adolevit erupitque,’ &c. Pollio no doubt had similar observations to proffer. 2 Ta

a monarchist, from perspicacious despair of human nature. There was no escape. Despite the nominal sovranty of law, one

ty of law, one man ruled. 2 This is his comment on Tiberius. It was no less true of the Principate of Augustus rather mo

ather more so. To be sure, the State was organized under a principate no dictatorship or monarchy. Names did not matter mu

ciled, with constitutional monarchy as a guarantee of freedom such as no Republic could provide: nunquam libertas gratio

the Whole World’. 1 That the power of Caesar Augustus was absolute, no contemporary could doubt. But his rule was just

le. While each class in society had its peculiar functions, there was no sharp division between classes. Service to Rome

his career, the achievements and character of his rule. The record is no less instructive for what it omits than for what

ver, does betray the truth, for auctoritas is also potentia. There is no word in this passage of the tribunicia potestas w

rs like those accorded to gods by grateful humanity: to Romans he was no more than the head of the Roman State. Yet one th

death, 300, 480; his remarkable career, 397; origin and name, 200 f.; no descendants, 498. Caninius Gallus, L. (cos. 37

27; in Spain, 213; in Gaul, 292, 302 f.; his origin and name, 90, 93; no descendants,498. Carthage, fall of, in relation

e, 353. Chumstinctus, Nervian, 475. Cicero, see Tullius. Cilicia, no longer a province, 260, 271 f. Cilicia Aspera,

eged ancestor of the Vitellii, 83. Favonius, M., friend of Cato, 2, no , 180, 198, 206. Ferentinum, 95, 362. Ferentum,

al and condemnation, 48, 66, 144; a Caesarian, 62, 81; his death, 62; no consular son, 498; alleged vices, 149; his charac

1. Gallia Narbonensis, as Caesar’s province, 36, 74 f.; in 44 B.C., no , 165; under the Triumvirate, 189, 207, 292; in th

s homo and admiral of Octavianus, 200, 237 f., 242, 328; origin, 237; no descendants, 498. Latium, plebeian families fro

349; legate of Syria, 398; his unpopularity, 376, 478; his wife, 379; no descendants, 498. Titulus Tiburtinus, attributi

of a knight, 95; proconsul of Asia, 102 f., 164; his fate, 172, 197; no descendants, 498. Treia, 360. Tremellius Scro

206; his consulate, 339; governor of Syria, 303, 309; character, 303; no descendants, 498. Tullius Cicero, Q., 64, 67. T

eged death-bed advice, 177; character and policy, 133; his wife, 134; no consular descendants, 498. Vibius Postumus, C.