History of Julius Caesar Vol. 2 of 2

Such was the memorable struggle now commenced at Rome between the consuls and the opposition. If we judge only from certain acts of violence related by the historians, we are at first tempted to accuse Crassus and Pompey of having had recourse to a strange abuse of force; but a more attentive examination proves that they were, so to say, constrained to it by the turbulent intrigues of a factious minority. In fact, these same historians, who describe complacently the means of culpable compulsion employed by the candidates for the consulship, allow contrary assertions to escape them here and there in the sequel, which help to deface the disagreeable impression made by their narrative. Thus, according to Cicero, public opinion blamed the hostility which was exercised against Pompey and Crassus.[671 - “In my opinion, that which it would have been best for his adversaries to do, would have been to cease a struggle which they are not strong enough to sustain… At the present day the only ambition one can have is to be quiet, and those who governed would be disposed to allow it us, if they found certain people less rigid against their domination.” (Cicero, Epist. Familiar., I. 8, letter to Lentulus.)] Plutarch, after presenting under the most unfavourable colours the manœuvres of the consuls for the distribution of the governments of the provinces, adds: “This partition pleased all parties. The people desired that Pompey might not be sent away from Rome.”[672 - Plutarch, Crassus, 19.]

Cæsar might hope that the consulship of Pompey and Crassus would restore order and the supremacy of the laws: it did nothing of the sort. After having themselves so often violated legality and corrupted the elections, they sought to remedy the evil, which they had contributed to aggravate, by proposing severe measures against corruption; this tardy homage rendered to public morality was destined to remain without effect, like all the remedies which had hitherto been employed.

Pompey’s Sumptuary Law.

VI. They sought to repress extravagance by a sumptuary law, but a speech of Hortensius was sufficient to cause its rejection. The orator, after a brilliant picture of the greatness of the Republic, and of the progress of civilisation, of which Rome was the centre, proceeded to laud the consuls for their magnificence, and for the noble use they made of their immense riches.[673 - Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 37.] And, in fact, at that very moment Pompey was building the theatre which bore his name, and was giving public games, in which it seemed his wish to surpass the acts of sumptuous extravagance of the most prodigal courtiers of the Roman people.[674 - Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 38.] In these games, which lasted several days, 500 lions and eighteen elephants were slain. This spectacle inspired the mob with admiration; but it was remarked that, usually insensible to the death of the gladiators who expired under their eyes, they were affected by the cries of pain of the elephants. Cicero, who was present at these festivals, places, in the relation he addresses to one of his friends, the men and the animals on the same footing, and displays no more regret for the one than for the other, the spirit of humanity was still so little developed![675 - Cicero, Epist. Familiar., VII. 1.]

The splendour of these games had dazzled Rome and Italy, and restored to Pompey a great part of his prestige; but the levies of troops, which he was obliged to order soon afterwards, caused great discontent. Several tribunes vainly opposed their veto; they were obliged to renounce a struggle which had Pompey, and especially Crassus, to sustain it.

Departure of Crassus for Syria.

VII. Without waiting for the end of his consulship, Crassus determined on quitting Rome; he left in the last days of October.[676 - According to the letter from Cicero to Atticus (IV. 13), Crassus had left Rome a little before the 17th of the Calends of December, 699, which answers, according to the concordance established by M. Le Verrier, to the 28th of October, 699.] As we have said, it was not the government of Syria which excited his ardour; his aim was to carry the war into the country of the Parthians, in order to acquire new glory, and obtain possession of the treasures of those rich countries.

The idea of this expedition was not new. The Parthians had long awakened the jealousy of Rome. They had extended their frontiers from the Caucasus to the Euphrates,[677 - Justin, XLI. 6.] and considerably increased their importance; their chief assumed, like Agamemnon, the title of king of kings. It is true that the part of Mesopotamia taken from the Parthians by Tigranes had been restored to them by Lucullus, and Pompey had renewed the treaty which made the Euphrates the frontier of the empire of the Arsacides. But this treaty had not always been respected, for it was not one of the habits of the Republic to suffer a too powerful neighbour. Nevertheless, different circumstances might, at this moment, lead the Senate to make war upon the Parthians. While A. Gabinius exercised the command in Syria, Mithridates, dethroned, on account of his cruelty, by his younger brother Orodes, had invoked the support of the proconsul; and the latter was on the point of giving it, when Pompey sent him orders to repair first into Egypt to replace Ptolemy on his throne. Mithridates, besieged in Babylon, had surrendered to his brother, who had caused him to be put to death.[678 - Justin, XLII. 4.] On another hand, the Parthians were always at war with the kings of Armenia, allies of the Romans. The Senate, had it the wish, was not, therefore, in want of pretexts for declaring war. It had to avenge the death of a friendly pretender, and to sustain a threatened ally. To what point could the law of nations be invoked? That is doubtful; but, for several centuries, the Republic had been in the habit of consulting its own interests much more than justice, and the war against the Parthians was quite as legitimate as the wars against Perseus, Antiochus, or Carthage.

Nevertheless, this enterprise encountered a warm opposition at Rome; the party hostile to the consuls feared the glory which it might reflect upon Crassus, and many prudent minds dreaded the perils of so distant an expedition; but Cæsar, who had inherited that passion of the ancient Romans who dreamt for their town the empire of the world, encouraged Crassus in his projects, and, in the winter of 700, he sent Publius to his father, with 1,000 picked Gaulish cavalry.

Inauspicious auguries marked the departure of the proconsul. The two tribunes of the people, C. Ateius Capito and P. Aquilius Gallus, adherents of the party of the nobles, opposed it. They had succeeded in imparting their sentiments to many of their fellow-citizens. Crassus, intimidated, took with him Pompey, whose ascendency over the people was so powerful that his presence was sufficient to put a stop to all hostile manifestation. Ateius Capito was not discouraged; he gave orders to an usher to place Crassus under arrest at the moment when he was leaving Rome. The other tribune prevented this act of violence. Then, seeing that all his efforts had failed, he had recourse to an extreme measure: he sent for a chafing-dish, and threw perfumes into it, while he pronounced against Crassus the most terrible curses. These imprecations were of a nature to strike the superstitious minds of the Romans. People did not fail to call them to memory afterwards, when news came of the Syrian disasters.

Cato proposes to deliver Cæsar to the Germans.

VIII. About the same time, the news arrived at Rome of the defeat of the Usipetes and Tencteri, of the passage of the Rhine, and of the descent in Britain; they excited a warm enthusiasm, and the Senate decreed twenty days of thanksgiving.[679 - De Bello Gallico, IV. 38.] The last expedition especially made a great impression on people’s minds; it was like the discovery of a new world; the national pride was flattered at learning that the legions had penetrated into an unknown country, from which immense advantages for the Republic were promised.[680 - “Cæsar was very proud of his expedition into Britain, and everybody at Rome cried it up with enthusiasm. People congratulated each other on becoming acquainted with a country of the existence of which they were previously ignorant, and of having penetrated into countries of which they had never heard before; everybody took his hopes for reality, and all that people flattered themselves with obtaining some day caused as great an outburst of joy as if they had already possessed it.” (Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 53.) – “After having landed in Britain, Cæsar believed he had discovered a new world. He wrote (it is unknown to whom) that Britain was not an island, but a country surrounding the ocean.” (Eumenius, Panegyrici, IV. 2.)] Yet all were not dazzled by the military successes; some pretended that Cæsar had crossed, not the ocean, but a mere pool,[681 - Lucan, Pharsalia, II., line 571.] and Cato, persevering in his hatred, proposed to deliver him to the Germans. He accused him of having attacked them at the moment when they were sending deputies, and, by this violation of the law of nations, drawn upon Rome the anger of Heaven; “they must,” he said, “turn it upon the head of the perfidious general:” an impotent diatribe, which did not prevail against the public feeling![682 - “Without paying any attention to the opinion of Cato, the people during fifteen days performed sacrifices to celebrate this victory, and exhibited the greatest marks of joy.” (Plutarch, Nicias and Crassus, 4.)] Yet, as soon as Cæsar was informed of it, too sensitive, perhaps, to the insult, he wrote to the Senate a letter full of invectives and accusations against Cato. The latter at first repelled them calmly; then, taking advantage of the circumstance, he began to paint, in the darkest colours, Cæsar’s pretended designs. “It was,” he said, “neither the Germans nor the Gauls they had to fear, but this ambitious man, whose designs were apparent to everybody.” These words produced a strong impression on an auditory already prejudiced unfavourably. Nevertheless, the fear of the public opinion prevented any decision; for, according to Plutarch, “Cato made no impression outside the Senate; the people desired that Cæsar should be raised to the highest power, and the Senate, though it was of the same opinion as Cato, dared not to act, through fear of the people.”[683 - Plutarch, Cato of Utica, 58.]

CHAPTER V.

EVENTS OF THE YEAR 700

Second Descent in England.

I. THE expedition to England, in 699, may be said to have been only a reconnoitring visit, showing the necessity of more numerous forces and more considerable preparations to subjugate the warlike people of Great Britain. Accordingly, before starting for Italy, Cæsar gave orders to build on the coast, and especially at the mouth of the Seine, a great number of ships fitted for the transport of troops. In the month of June he left Italy, visited his stocks where the vessels were building, appointed Boulogne as the general rendezvous of his fleet, and, while it was assembling, marched rapidly, with four legions, towards the country of the Treviri, where the inhabitants, who had rebelled against his orders, were divided into two parties, having at their head, one Indutiomarus, and the other Cingetorix. He gave the power to the latter, who was favourable to the Romans. After having thus calmed the agitation of that country, Cæsar repaired at once to Boulogne, where he found 800 ships ready to put to sea; he embarked with five legions and 2,000 cavalry, and, without any resistance, landed, as in the year before, near Deal. A first successful combat, not far from Kingston, engaged him to continue his advance, when he received information that a tempest had just destroyed part of his fleet; he then returned to the coast, took the measures necessary for repairing this new disaster, caused all his ships to be drawn on land, and surrounded them with a retrenchment adjoining to the camp. He next marched towards the Thames. On his way he encountered the Britons, who, vanquished in two successive combats, had nevertheless more than once scattered trouble and disorder through the ranks of the legions, thanks to their chariots; these engines of war, mixed with the cavalry, spread terror and disconcerted the Roman tactics. Cæsar forced the passage of the Thames at Sunbury, went to attack the citadel of Cassivellaunus near St. Albans, and obtained possession of it. Several tribes, situated to the south of that river, made their submission. Then, dreading the approach of the equinox, and especially the troubles which might break out in Gaul during his absence, he returned to the continent.

Displacement of the Army. Disaster of Sabinus.

II. Immediately on his return, he placed his legions in winter quarters: Sabinus and Cotta at Tongres; Cicero at Charleroi; Labienus at Lavacherie, on the Ourthe; Fabius at Saint-Pol; Trebonius at Amiens; Crassus at Montdidier; Plancus at Champlieu; and, lastly, Roscius in the country of Séez. This displacement of the army, rendered necessary by the difficulty of provisioning it, separated by great distances the quarters from each other, though all, except that of Roscius, were comprised in a radius of 100 miles.

As in the preceding years, Cæsar believed he might repair into Italy; but Gaul still chafed under the yoke of the foreigner, and, while the people of Orleans massacred Tasgetius, who had been given them for their king three years before, events of a more serious character were in preparation in the countries situate between the Rhine and the Meuse. The people of Liége, led by Ambiorix and Cativolcus, revolt and attack, at Tongres, the camp occupied by Sabinus and Cotta with fifteen cohorts. Unable to take it by assault, they have recourse to stratagem: they spread abroad the report of the departure of Cæsar, and of the revolt of the whole of Gaul; they offer the two lieutenants to let them go, without obstacle, to rejoin the nearest winter quarters. Sabinus assembles a council of war, in which Cotta, an old experienced soldier, refused all arrangement with the enemy; but, as often happens in such meetings, the majority rallies to the least energetic opinion; the fifteen cohorts, trusting in the promise of the Gauls, abandon their impregnable position, and begin their march. On arriving at the defile of Lowaige, they are attacked and massacred by the barbarians, who had placed themselves in an ambuscade in the woods. Ambiorix, emboldened by this success, raises all the peoples on his way, and hastens, at Charleroi, to attack the camp of Cicero. The legion, though taken unexpectedly, defends itself bravely, but the Gauls have learnt from deserters the art of besieging fortresses in the Roman manner; they raise towers, construct covered galleries, and surround the camp with a countervallation. Meanwhile Cicero has found the means of informing Cæsar of his critical position. The latter was at Amiens; the morrow of the day on which he receives this news, he starts with two legions, and sends a Gaul to announce his approach. The assailants, informed on their part of Cæsar’s march, abandon the siege, and go to meet him. The two armies encounter near the little stream of the Haine, at fourteen kilomètres from Charleroi. Shut up in his retrenchments on Mont Sainte-Aldegonde, Cæsar counterfeits fear, in order to provoke the Gauls to attack him; and when they rush upon the ramparts to storm them, he sallies out through all the gates, puts the enemies to the rout, and strews the ground with their dead. The same day he rejoins Cicero, congratulates the soldiers on their courage, and his lieutenant for having been faithful to the Roman principle of never entering into negotiation with an enemy in arms. For the moment this victory defeated at one blow the aggressive attempts of the populations on the banks of the Rhine against Labienus, and those of the maritime peoples on the coasts of the Straits against Roscius; but soon new disturbances arose: the inhabitants of the state of Sens expelled Cavarinus, whom Cæsar had given them for king; and, a little later, Labienus was forced to combat the inhabitants of the country of Trèves, whom he defeated in an engagement in which Indutiomarus was slain. With the exception of the peoples of Burgundy and Champagne, all Gaul was in fermentation, which obliged Cæsar to pass the winter in it.

L. Domitius Ahenobarbus and Appius Claudius Pulcher, Consuls.

III. During this time, the struggle of parties continued at Rome, and Pompey, charged with the supplying of provisions, having under his orders lieutenants and legions, posted himself at the gates of the town; his presence in Italy, a pledge of order and tranquillity, was accepted by all good citizens.[684 - See page 456.] His influence was, as Cæsar thought, to paralyse that of L. Domitius Ahenobarbus, who had obtained the consulship. In fact, when on the preceding occasion Crassus and Pompey placed themselves on the ranks as candidates for the consulship, the opposite party, hopeless of defeating both, had sought the admission of at least one of their candidates. They tried again the manœuvre they had employed in 695, by which they succeeded in the nomination of Bibulus as the colleague of Cæsar. The attempt had failed; but, at the moment when the question of the election of consuls for the year 700 was agitated, the aristocratic party, having no longer to contend against persons of such eminence as Crassus and Pompey, obtained without difficulty the election of Ahenobarbus. This latter represented alone, in that high magistracy, the passions hostile to the triumvirs, since his colleague Appius Claudius Pulcher was still, at that epoch, favourable to Cæsar.

The authority of the consuls, whoever they might be, was powerless for remedying the demoralisation of the upper classes, which was revealed by numerous symptoms at Rome as well as in the provinces. Cicero himself, as the following event proves, treated legality with contempt when it interfered with his affections or political opinions.

Re-establishment of Ptolemy in Egypt.

IV. The Sibylline oracle, it will be remembered, had forbidden recourse to arms for the purpose of restoring Ptolemy, King of Egypt, to his states. In spite of this prohibition, Cicero, as early as the year 698, had engaged P. Lentulus, proconsul in Cilicia and in Cyprus, to re-establish him by force, and, to encourage this enterprise, he had suggested to him the prospect of impunity in success, without, however, concealing from him that, in case of reverse, the legal question, as well, as the religious question, would assume a threatening form.[685 - Cicero, Epist. Familiar., I. 7.] Lentulus had thought it prudent to abstain; but Gabinius, proconsul in Syria in the following year, had not shown the same degree of scruple. Bribed by the king, some said, but, as others said, having received orders from Pompey, he had left his son in Syria with a few troops, and had marched with his legions towards Egypt.

After having, on his way, plundered Judæa, and sent prisoner to Rome its king Aristobulus, he crossed the desert, and arrived before Pelusium. A certain Archelaus, who was looked upon as a good general, and had served under Mithridates, was detained in Syria. Gabinius, informed that Queen Berenice wished to place him at the head of her army, and that she offered a large sum of money for his ransom, immediately set him at liberty, showing thereby as much avidity for riches as contempt for the Egyptians. He defeated them in several battles, slew Archelaus, and entered Alexandria, where he re-established Ptolemy on the throne, and the latter, it is said, gave him 10,000 talents.[686 - Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 56, 57, 58. —Schol. Bob. Pro Plancio, 271.] In this expedition, Mark Antony, who was soon to be Cæsar’s quæstor, commanded the cavalry; he distinguished himself by his intrepidity and by his military talent.[687 - Plutarch, Antony, 2.] This was the commencement of his fortune.

Gabinius, if we believe Dio Cassius, took good care not to send an account of his conduct, but it was not long in becoming known, and he was compelled to return to Rome, where serious accusations awaited him. Unfortunately for him, when the period of his trial came on, Pompey, his protector, was no longer consul.

Gabinius had to undergo in succession two accusations: he was acquitted of the first, on the double head of sacrilege and high treason, because he paid heavy bribes to his judges.[688 - Dio Cassius speaks of it as follows: “The influence of powerful men and of riches was so great, even against the decrees of the people and of the Senate, that Pompey wrote to Gabinius, governor of Syria, to charge him with the restoring of Ptolemy in Egypt, and that he, who had already taken the field, performed this task, in spite of the public will, and in contempt of the oracles of the Sibyl. Pompey only sought to do what would be agreeable to Ptolemy; but Gabinius had yielded to corruption. Afterwards, when brought under accusation for this fact, he was not condemned, thanks to Pompey and to his gold. There reigned then in Rome such a degree of moral disorder, that the magistrates and judges, who had received from Gabinius but a small part of the sums which had served to corrupt him, set their duties at nought in order to enrich themselves, and taught others to do evil, by showing them that they could easily escape punishment with money. It was this which caused Gabinius to be acquitted; in the sequel, brought to trial for having carried off from his province more than 100,000,000 drachmas, he was condemned.” (Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 55.)] As to the second accusation, relating to acts of extortion, he experienced more difficulties. Pompey, who had been obliged to absent himself, in order to provide for the provisioning with which he was charged, hastened to the gates of Rome, which his office of proconsul did not allow him to enter, convoked an assembly of the people outside the Pomœrium, employed all his authority, and even read letters from Cæsar, in favour of the accused. Still more, he begged Cicero to undertake his defence, and Cicero accepted the task, forgetting the invectives with which he had overwhelmed Gabinius before the Senate. All these efforts failed: it was necessary to yield to the rage of the public opinion, skilfully excited by the enemies of Gabinius; and the latter, condemned, went into exile, where he remained until Cæsar’s dictatorship.[689 - Dio Cassius, XXXIX. 43.]

Corruption of the Elections.

V. We are astonished to see personages such as Pompey and Cæsar protecting men who seem to have borne such bad character as Gabinius; but, to judge with impartiality the men of that period, we must not forget, in the first place, that there were very few without blemish, and, further, that the political parties never hesitated in throwing upon their adversaries the most odious calumnies. Gabinius, belonging to the popular faction, and the partisan of Pompey, had incurred the hatred of the aristocracy and of the farmers of the revenues. The nobles never pardoned him for being the author of the law which had entrusted to Pompey the command of the expedition against the pirates, and for having shown, during his proconsulship in Syria, want of deference in regard to the Senate. So that assembly refused, in 698, to order thanksgivings for his victories.[690 - Cicero, Epist. ad Quint., II. 8.] The farmers of the revenues bore ill-will towards him on account of his decrees against usury,[691 - See the Index Legum of Baiter, 181.] and his solicitude for the interests of his province.[692 - Josephus, XIV. 48.] This proconsul, who is represented as an adventurer pillaging those under his administration, appears to have governed Judæa with justice, and to have restored with skill, on his return from Egypt, the order which had been disturbed during his absence. His military capacity cannot be called in doubt. In speaking of him, the historian Josephus closes with these words his account of the battle against the Nabathæi: “This great captain, after so many exploits, returned to Rome, and Crassus succeeded him in the government of Syria.”[693 - Josephus, XIV. 11.] Nevertheless, it is very probable that Gabinius was not more scrupulous than the other proconsuls in matter of probity; for, if corruption then displayed itself with impudence in the provinces, it was perhaps still more shameless in Rome. The following is a striking example. Two candidates for the consulship, Domitius Calvinus and Memmius Gemellus, united their clients and resources of all kinds to obtain the first magistracy. In their desire to procure the support of Ahenobarbus and Claudius Pulcher, the consuls in office, they engaged by writing to secure for them, on their quitting office, the provinces they desired, and that by a double fraud: they promised first to bring three augurs to affirm the existence of a supposititious curiate law, and then to find two consulars who would declare that they had assisted at the regulation relative to the distribution of the provinces; in case of non-performance, there was stipulated, for the profit of the consuls, 400,000 sestertii.[694 - Cicero, Ep. ad Atticum, IV. 18.] This shameless traffic and others of the same kind, in which were compromised Æmilius Scaurus and Valerius Messala, had caused the interest of money to be doubled.[695 - Cicero, Ep. ad Quintum, IV. 15.] The bargain would probably have been carried out, if, in consequence of a quarrel between the two consuls, Memmius had not denounced the convention in full Senate, and produced the contract. The scandal was enormous, but it remained unpunished as regarded the consuls.

Memmius, formerly Cæsar’s enemy, had recently joined his party; nevertheless, the latter, incensed at his impudence, blamed his conduct, and abandoned him; Memmius was exiled.[696 - Schol. Bob. Pro Sextio, 297. – Cicero, Epist. ad Atticum, IV. 16; Epist. Familiar., XIII. 19.] As to Domitius, he was, it is true, accused of solicitation, and the Senate intended absolutely to close the consulship against him by deciding that the consular comitia should not be held until after judgment had been given on his trial.

All these facts bear witness to the decay of society, for the moral degradation of the individuals must infallibly bring with it the abasement of the institutions.

Death of Cæsar’s Daughter.

VI. Towards the month of August of the year 700, Cæsar lost his mother Aurelia, and, a few days afterwards, his daughter Julia. The latter, whose health had been declining since the troubles of the preceding year, had become pregnant; she died in giving birth to a son, which did not survive. Cæsar was painfully affected by this misfortune,[697 - “Cæsar has written to me from Britain a letter dated on the Calends of September (28th of August), which I received on the 4th of the Calends of October (23rd of September). His mourning had prevented my replying and congratulating him.” (Cicero, Epist. ad Quintum, III. 1.)] of which he received the news during his expedition to Britain.[698 - “In Cæsar’s affliction, I dare not write to him, but I write to Balbus.” (Cicero, Epist. Familiar., VII. 9.) – “How kind and affecting is Cæsar’s letter! There is in what he writes a charm which increases my sympathy for the misfortune which afflicts him.” (Cicero, Epist. ad Quintum, III. 1.)] Pompey was desirous of burying his wife in his estate of Alba; but the populace opposed it, carried the body to the Campus Martius, and insisted on its being buried there. By that rare privilege reserved to illustrious men, the people sought, according to Plutarch, to honour rather the daughter of Cæsar than the wife of Pompey.[699 - Plutarch, Pompey, 4.] This death broke one of the ties which united the two most important men of the Republic. To create new ties, Cæsar proposed his niece Octavia in marriage to Pompey, whose daughter he offered to espouse, although she was already married to Faustus Sylla.[700 - Suetonius, Cæsar, 27.]

Cæsar’s Buildings at Rome.

VII. At the same period, the proconsul of Gaul was, with the produce of his booty, rebuilding at Rome a magnificent edifice, the old basilica of the Forum, which was extended as far as to the Temple of Liberty. “It will be the most beautiful thing in the world,” says Cicero; “there will be in the Campus Martius seven electoral enclosures and galleries of marble which will be surrounded with great porticoes of a thousand paces. Near it will be a public villa.” Paulus was charged with the execution of the works; Cicero and Oppius considered that 60,000,000 sestertii was a small sum for such an undertaking.[701 - Cicero, Epist. ad Atticum, IV. 17. – Suetonius, Cæsar, 36.] According to Pliny, the mere purchase of the site in the Forum cost Cæsar the sum of 100,000,000 sestertii.[702 - Pliny, Hist. Nat., XXXVI. 15.] This building, interrupted by events, was only finished after the African war.[703 - Appian, De Bel. Civil., II. 102.]

His Relations with Cicero.

VIII. While Cæsar was gaining, by these works destined for the public, the general admiration, he neglected none of those attentions which were of a nature to ensure him the alliance of men of importance. Cicero, as we have seen, was already reconciled with him, and Cæsar had done all in his power to gain his attachment still further. He flattered his self-love, listened to all his recommendations,[704 - “Have you any other protégé to send me? I take charge of him.” (Letter of Cæsar cited by Cicero, Epist. Familiar., VII. 5.) – “I say not a word, I take not a step in Cæsar’s interest, but he immediately testifies in high terms that he attaches to it a value which assures me of his affection.” (Cicero, Epist. Familiar., VII. 5.)] treating with great friendship Quintus Cicero, whom he had made one of his lieutenants; he went so far as to place at the disposal of the great orator his credit and fortune,[705 - “I dispose, as though they were my own, of his credit, which is preponderant, and of his resources, which, you know, are immense.” (Epist. Familiar., I. 9.) – A few years later, when Cicero foresaw the civil war, he wrote to Atticus: “There is, however, an affair of which I shall not cease speaking as long as I write to you at Rome: it is Cæsar’s credit. Free me, before leaving, I implore you.” (Cicero, Epist. ad Atticum, V. 6.)] and accordingly Cicero was in continual correspondence with him. He composed, as we have seen, poems in his honour, and he wrote to Quintus “that he placed above everything the friendship of such a man, whose affection he prized as much as that of his brother and children.”[706 - Epist. ad Quintum, II. 15; III. 1.] Elsewhere he said: “The memorable and truly divine behaviour of Cæsar towards me and towards my brother has imposed upon me the duty of seconding him in all his designs.”[707 - Epist. Familiar., I. 9.] And he had kept his word. It was at Cæsar’s request that Cicero had consented to resume his old friendly relations with Crassus,[708 - “I have undertaken his defense (that of Crassus) in the Senate, as high recommendations and my own engagement made it imperative for me.” (Epist. Familiar., I. 9.)] and to defend Gabinius and Rabirius. This last, compromised in the affairs of Egypt, was accused of having received great sums of money from King Ptolemy; but Cicero proved that he was poor, and reduced to live upon Cæsar’s generosity, and, in the course of the trial, he expressed himself as follows: —

“Will you, judges, know the truth? If the generosity of C. Cæsar, extreme towards everybody, had not, in regard to Rabirius, passed all belief, we should have ceased long ago to see him in the Forum. Cæsar singly performs towards Postumus the duty of his numerous friends; and the services which these rendered to his prosperity, Cæsar lavishes them upon his adversity. Postumus is no longer more than the shadow of a Roman knight; if he preserves this title, it is by the protection, by the devotedness of a single friend. This phantom of his old rank, which Cæsar alone has preserved for him and assists him in sustaining, is the only wealth that we can now take from him. And this is a reason why we ought the more to maintain him in it in his distress. It cannot be the effect of a mean merit, to inspire, absent and in misfortune, so much interest in such a man, who, in so lofty a fortune, does not disdain to cast down his looks on the affairs of others. In that pre-occupation with the great things which he is doing or has done, we should not be astonished if we saw him forget his friends, and, if he forgot them, he would easily obtain forgiveness.

“I have recognised in Cæsar very eminent and wonderful qualities; but his other virtues are, as on a vast theatre, exposed to the gaze of nations. To choose with skill the place for a camp, to marshal an army, to take fortresses, break through enemies’ lines, face the rigour of winter and those frosts which we support with difficulty in the bosom of our towns and houses, to pursue the enemy in that same season when the wild beasts hide in the depth of their retreats, and where everywhere the law of nations gives a truce to combats: these are great things; who denies it? but they have for their motive the most magnificent of recompenses, the hope of living for ever in men’s memory. Such efforts cause us no surprise in the man who aspires to immortality.

“But this is the glory which I admire in Cæsar, a glory which is neither celebrated by the verses of poets nor by the monuments of history, but which is weighed in the balance of the sage: a Roman knight, his old friend, attached, devoted, affectioned to his person, had been ruined, not by his excesses, not by shameful extravagance and the losses brought on by indulgence of the passions, but by a speculation which had for its object to augment his patrimony: Cæsar has arrested him in his descent; he has not suffered him to fall, he has held out his hand to him, has sustained him with his wealth, with his credit, and he still sustains him at the present time; he holds back his friend on the edge of the precipice, and the calm of his mind is no more disturbed by the brightness of his own name, than his eyes are dazzled by the blaze of his glory. May the actions of which I have spoken be as great in our esteem as they are in reality! Let people think what they will of my opinion in this respect; but when I see, in the bosom of such a power and of such a prodigious fortune, this generosity towards others, this unforgetfulness of friendship, I prefer them to all the other virtues. And you, judges, far from this character of goodness, so new and so rare among considerable and illustrious men, being disdained or repulsed by you, you should wrap it up in your favour, and seek to encourage it; you should do this the more, since this moment seems to have been chosen for attacking Cæsar’s consideration, although, in this respect, we could do nothing but he supports it with constancy or repairs it without difficulty. But if he hears that one of his best friends has been struck in his honour, it will be with the deepest pain, and to him an irreparable misfortune.”[709 - Cicero, Pro Rabirio Postumo, 15, 16.]

In another circumstance, Cicero explained as follows the reason of his attachment for the conqueror of Gaul: “Should I refuse my praises to Cæsar, when I know that the people, and, after its example, the Senate, from which my heart has never been severed, have shown their esteem for him by loud and multiplied testimonies? Then, without doubt, it must be confessed that the general interest has no influence on my sentiments, and that individuals alone are the objects of my hatred or of my friendship! What then? Should I see my vessel float with full sails towards a port which, without being the same which I preferred formerly, is neither less sure nor less tranquil, and, at the risk of my life, wrestle against the tempest rather than trust myself to the skill of the pilot who promises to save me? No, there is no inconstancy in following the movements which storms impress on the vessel of the state. For me, I have learned, I have recognized, I have read a truth, and the writers of our nation, as well as those of other peoples, have consecrated it in their works by the example of the wisest and most illustrious of men; it is, that we ought not to persist irrevocably in our opinions, but that we ought to accept the sentiments which are required by the situation of the state, the diversity of conjunctures, and the interests of peace.”[710 - Cicero, Pro Cn. Plancio, 39. (A.U.C. 700.)]

In his Oration against Piso, he exclaims: “It would be impossible for me, in contemplation of the great things which Cæsar has done, and which he is doing every day, not to be his friend. Since he has the command of your armies, it is no longer the rampart of the Alps which I seek to oppose to the invasion of the Gauls; it is no longer by means of the barrier of the Rhine, with all its gurges, that I seek to arrest the fierce Germanic nations. Cæsar has done so much that, if the mountains should be levelled, and the rivers dried, our Italy, deprived of her natural fortifications, would find, in the result of his victories and exploits, a safe defence.”[711 - Cicero, Orat. in L. Calpurnium Pisonem, 33. (A.U.C. 700.)]

The warm expansion of such sentiments must have touched Cæsar, and inspired him with confidence; therefore he earnestly engaged Cicero not to quit Rome.[712 - Cicero, Epist. ad Quintum, III. 1.]

The influence of Cæsar continued to increase, as the letters and orations of Cicero sufficiently testify. If it was required to raise citizens such as C. Messius, M. Orfius, M. Curtius, C. Trebatius,[713 - Cicero, Epist. ad Atticum, IV. 15; Epist. Familiar., VII. 5; Epist. ad Quintum, II. 15.] to elevated positions, or to excite the interest of the judges in favour of an accused, as in the trials of Balbus, Rabirius, and Gabinius, it was always the same support which was invoked.[714 - “Pompey is all for Gutta, and he is confident of obtaining from Cæsar an active intervention.” (Cicero, Epist. ad Quintum, III. 8.)]

CHAPTER VI.

EVENTS OF THE YEAR 701

Expedition to the North of Gaul. Second Passage of the Rhine.

I. THE disturbed state of Gaul and the loss of fifteen cohorts at Tongres obliged Cæsar to augment his army; he raised two legions in the Cisalpine, and asked for a third from Pompey. Again at the head of ten legions, Cæsar, with his usual activity, hastened to repress the incipient insurrections. From the Scheldt to the Rhine, from the Seine to the Loire, most of the peoples were in arms. Those of Trèves had called the Suevi to their assistance.

Without waiting for the end of winter, Cæsar brought together four legions at Amiens, and, falling unexpectedly upon the peoples of Hainault, forced from them a speedy submission. Then he convoked in this latter town the general assembly of Gaul; but the peoples of Sens, Orleans, and Trèves did not repair to it. He then transferred the assembly to Paris, and afterwards marched upon Sens, where his appearance sufficed to pacify not only that country, but also that of Orleans. Having thus appeased in a short time the troubles of the north and centre of Gaul, he directed all his attention towards the countries situated between the Rhine and the Meuse, where Ambiorix continued to excite revolt. He was impatient to avenge upon him the defeat of Sabinus; but, to make more sure of overtaking him, he resolved first to make two expeditions, one into Brabant, the other into the country of Trèves, and in this manner to cut off that chieftain from all retreat, either on the side of the north, or on the side of the east, where the Germans were.

He advanced in person towards Brabant, which he soon reduced to obedience. During this time, Labienus gained, on the banks of the Ourthe, a great victory over the inhabitants of the country of Trèves. At the news of this defeat, the Germans, who had already crossed the Rhine, returned home. Cæsar rejoined Labienus on the territory of Trèves, and, determined to chastise the Suevi, he a second time crossed the Rhine, near Bonn, a little above the place where he had built a bridge two years before. After compelling the Suevi to take refuge in the interior of their territory, he returned to Gaul, caused a part of the bridge to be cut, and left a strong garrison on the left bank.