[-15-] They came very near being detected by reason of the number of those concerned and by their delay. Caesar, however, would not receive any information about such an undertaking and punished very severely those who brought any news of the kind. Still, they stood in awe of him and put the matter off, fearing that although he had no guard they might be killed by the persons surrounding him at various times; and thus they ran the risk of being discovered and perishing. Indeed, they would have suffered this fate, had they not been forced even against their will to hasten the plot. A report went abroad, true or false after the manner of reports, that the so-called fifteen priests were declaring that the Sibyl had said the Parthians should never be captured in any other way than by a king, and the people were consequently preparing to propose that this title be granted to Caesar. The conspirators believed this to be true, and because a vote would be demanded of the officials, among whom were Brutus and Cassius, owing to the seriousness of the measure, they felt that they neither dared to oppose it nor could submit to keep silent, and so hurried on the consummation of the plot before any business connected with the measure could come up.

[-16-] It had been decided by them to make the attempt in the senate, for they thought that there Caesar would least expect to be harmed in any way and would so fall an easier victim, while they would possess opportunity coupled with security by having their swords instead of documents brought in boxes, and that the rest being unarmed would be unable to make any resistance. In case any one should be so rash, they expected at least that the gladiators, many of whom they had previously stationed in Pompey's Theatre under the pretext that they were to practice with arms, would assist them. These were to lie in wait there in a certain room of the peristyle. The conspirators, when the appointed day had come, gathered in the senate-hall at dawn and called for Caesar. [-17-] As for him, he was warned of the plot in advance by the soothsayers, and was warned also by dreams. The night before he was slain his wife had a vision of their house fallen in ruins, her husband wounded by some men and taking refuge in her bosom, and of Caesar being raised aloft upon the clouds and grasping the hand of Jupiter. Moreover omens not few nor indistinct crossed his path. The arms of Mars, at that time deposited at his house by virtue of his position as high priest and by ancestral custom, made a great noise at night, and the doors of the chamber where he slept opened of their own accord. The sacrifices which he offered because of these occurrences indicated nothing favorable and the birds with which he practiced divination forbade him to leave the house. After his assassination, finally, some recalled a weighty incident in connection with his gilded chair,—that the servant, as Caesar was slow in coming, carried it out of the senate, thinking that he would have no further need of it.

[-18-] Caesar for this reason was so long in coming that the conspirators feared there might be a postponement (a rumor circulated, indeed, that he would remain at home that day), and their plot thus fall through and they themselves be detected. Therefore they sent Decimus Brutus, as one appearing to be a devoted friend, to secure his attendance. This man made light of Caesar's scruples and by adding that the senate was extremely anxious to behold him, persuaded him to go forward. At this an image of his which he kept set up in the vestibule fell of its own accord and was shattered to pieces. He ought then to have changed his purpose, but instead he paid no attention to this and would not listen to some one who was giving him information of the plot. He received from him a little roll in which all the preparations made for the attack had been accurately inscribed, but did not read it, thinking that it was some other not very pressing matter. In brief, he was so confident that to the soothsayer who had warned him to beware of that day he said jokingly: "Where are your prophecies? Don't you see that the day over which you were all of a tremble is here and I am alive?" And the other, they say, answered only this: "Yes, it is here, but not yet gone."

[-19-] Now when he finally reached the senate Trebonius delayed Antony somewhere at a distance outside. They had planned to kill both him and Lepidus. But fearing that they might be ill spoken of as a result of the number of those destroyed, and that it might be said that they had slain Caesar to gain power and not to free the city, as they pretended, they did not wish Antony even to be present at his slaughter. As for Lepidus, he had set out on a campaign and was in the suburbs. Antony was held by Trebonius in conversation. Meanwhile the rest in a body surrounded Caesar (he was as easy of access and ready to be addressed as any one could have wished), and some talked among themselves, while others presented petitions to him, so that suspicion might be as far from his mind as possible. When the right moment came, one of them approached him as if to express his thanks for some favor or other and pulled his cloak from his shoulder; for this, according to the agreement, served to the conspirators as a signal raised. Thereupon they attacked him from many sides at once and wounded him to death, so that by reason of their numbers Caesar was unable to say or do anything, but veiling his face was slain with many wounds. This is the truest account. In times past some have made a declaration like this, that to Brutus who struck him severely he said: "Thou, too, my child?"

[-20-] A great outcry naturally arose from all the rest who were inside and who were standing nearby outside at the suddenness of the event and because they were not acquainted with the slayers, their numbers, or their intention; and all were thrown into confusion, believing themselves in danger; so they themselves started in flight by whatever way each man could, and they alarmed those who met them by saying nothing definite, but merely shouting out these words: "Run, bolt doors! Run, bolt doors!" The rest, taking it up from one another as each one echoed the cries, filled the city with lamentations, and they burst into shops and houses to hide themselves. Yet the assassins hurried just as they were to the Forum, indicating both by their gestures and their shouts not to be afraid. At the same time that they said this they called continuously for Cicero: but the crowd did not believe that they were sincere, and was not easily calmed. Late in the day at last they gradually began to take courage and became quiet, as no one was killed or arrested. [-21-] When they met in the assembly the assassins had much to say against Caesar and much in favor of the democracy, and they bade the people take courage and not expect any harm. They had killed him, they declared, not to secure power or any other advantage, but in order that they might be free and independent and be governed rightly. By speaking such words they calmed the majority, especially since they injured no one. Fearing for all that that somebody might concert measures against them the conspirators ascended the Capitoline with the avowed intention of offering prayer to the gods, and there they spent the day and night. And at evening they were joined by some of the other prominent men who had not shared in the plot, but were anxious, when they saw the perpetrators praised, to secure the glory of it, as well as the prizes which those concerned expected. With great justice the affair happened to turn out the opposite way: they did not secure any reputation for the deed because they had not been partakers of it in any way, but they shared the danger which fell upon the ones who committed it just as much as if they themselves had been the plotters.

[-22-] Seeing this, Dolabella likewise did not see fit to keep quiet, but entered upon the consular office though it did not yet belong to him, and after a short speech to the people on the situation ascended the Capitol. While affairs were in this condition Lepidus, learning what had taken place, by night occupied the Forum with his soldiers and at dawn delivered a speech against the assassins. Antony immediately after Caesar's death had fled, casting away his robe of office in order to escape notice, and had concealed himself through the night. When, however, he ascertained that the assassins were on the Capitol and Lepidus in the Forum, he assembled the senate in the precinct of Tellus and brought forward the business of the hour for deliberation. Some said one thing, some another, as each of them thought about it: Cicero, whose advice they followed, spoke to this effect:—

[-23-] "On every occasion I think no one ought to say anything merely for the sake of winning favor or to show his spite, but to reveal just what the man in each case thinks to be the best. We demand that those who are praetors or consuls shall do everything from upright motives, and if they make any errors we demand an account from them even if their slip was accidental; and it will be unbearable if in debates, where we are complete masters of our own opinion, we shall abandon the common welfare with a view to private advantage. For this reason, Conscript Fathers, I have always thought that I ought to advise you on all matters with simplicity and justice, but especially under the present circumstances, when, if without being over-captious we come to an agreement, we shall be preserved ourselves and enable all the rest to survive, but if we wish to examine everything minutely, I fear ill fortune—but at the very opening of my address I do not wish to say anything displeasing. [-24-] Formerly, not very long ago, those who had arms usually also got control of the government and consequently issued orders to you as to the subjects on which you must deliberate, but you could not look forward and see what it was proper for them to do. But now practically all conditions are so favorably placed that the matter is in your hands and the responsibility rests upon you; and from your own selves you may obtain either concord and with it liberty, or seditions and civil wars again and a master at the close of them. Whatever you decide to-day all the rest will follow. This being the state of the case as I see it, I declare that you ought to abandon your mutual enmities or jealousies or whatever name should be applied to them, and return to that ancient condition of peace and friendship and harmony. For you should remember this, if nothing else, that so long as we enjoyed that kind of government, we acquired lands, fortunes, glory and allies, but ever since we were led into abusing one another, so far from growing better we have become decidedly worse off. I am so firmly convinced that nothing else at present could save the city that if we do not to-day, at once, with all possible speed, adopt some policy, we shall never be able to regain our position.

[-25-] "Notice carefully that I am speaking only the truth, of which you may convince yourselves if you regard present conditions and then consider our position in old times. Do you not see what is taking place,—that the populace is again being divided and torn asunder and that, some choosing this side, and some that, they have already fallen into two parties and two camps, that the one side has taken timely possession of the Capitol as if they feared the Gauls or somebody, and the other side with headquarters in the Forum is preparing to besiege them and so behaving like Carthaginians, and not as though they too were Romans? Do you not hear that though formerly citizens often differed, even to the extent of occupying the Aventine once, and the Capitol, and some of them the Sacred Mount, as often as they were reconciled one with another on equal terms (or by yielding but a small point) they at once stopped hating one another, to live the rest of their lives in such peace and harmony that in common they carried through successfully many great wars? As often, on the other hand, as they had recourse to murders and assassinations, the one side deceived by the justification of defending themselves against the encroachments of the other, and the other side by an ambition to appear to be inferior to none, no good ever came of it. Why need I waste time by repeating to you, who know them equally well, the names of Valerius, Horatius, Saturninus, Glaucia, the Gracchi? With such examples before you, not of foreign origin but native to this land, do not hesitate to strive after the right course and guard against the wrong. Having from the events of history received a proof of the outcome of the situation on which you are deliberating, regard my exhortation no longer as mere words but believe that the welfare of the community is at stake this instant. Do not for any doubtful theory cast away the certainty of hope, but trusting to a reliable pledge secure in advance a sure result for your calculations.

[-26-] "It is in your power, if you receive this evidence that I mentioned from your own land and your own ancestors, to decide rightly. And this is why I did not wish to cite instances from abroad, though I might have mentioned countless of them. One instance, nevertheless, I will offer from the best and most ancient city from which our fathers did not disdain to introduce certain laws; for it would be a disgrace for us who so far surpass the Athenians in strength and sense, to deliberate less well than they. They were once—of course you all know this—at variance, and as a result were overcome in war by the Lacedaemonians and endured a tyranny of the more powerful citizens; and they did not obtain a respite from evils until they made a compact and agreement to forget their past injuries, though many and severe, and never to allow a single reproach because of them or to bear malice against any one. Now when they had attained such a degree of wisdom, they not only ceased enduring tyrannies and seditions, but flourished in every way, regaining their city, laying claim to the sovereignty of the Greeks, and finally becoming powerful enough to decide frequently on the preservation or destruction both of the Lacedaemonians themselves and of the Thebans. Now notice, that if those men who seized Phyle and came home from the Peirseus had chosen to take vengeance on the city party for wrongs suffered, they would, to be sure, have seemed to have performed a justifiable action, but they would have undergone, as well as have caused, many evils. Just as they exceeded their hopes by defeating their foes, they might perhaps themselves have been in turn unexpectedly worsted. [-27-] In such matters there is nothing sure, and one does not necessarily gain the mastery as a result of being strong, but vast numbers who were confident have failed and vast numbers who were looking to defeat somebody have perished before they could strike. The party that is overreached in any transaction is not bound to be fortunate just because it is wronged, nor is the party which has the greater power bound to be successful just because it surpasses, but both are equally subservient to human uncertainty and the mutability of fortune, and the issue they secure is often not in accordance with the favorable prognostications of the one side, but proves to be what the other actually dared not expect. As a result of this, and of intense rivalry (for man is strongly given when wronged or believing himself wronged to become beyond measure bold) many are on many occasions inspired to undergo dangers even beyond their strength, with the determination to conquer or at least not to perish utterly without having shed some blood. So it is that partly conquering and partly defeated, sometimes gaining the mastery over others and again falling prostrate themselves, some are altogether annihilated and others gain a Cadmean victory, as it is called, and at a time when the knowledge can avail them nothing they perceive that their plans were ill drawn.

[-28-] "That this is so you also have learned by experience. Consider, Marius for some time had power in seditions; then he was driven out, collected a force, and accomplished what you know. Likewise Sulla—not to speak of Cinna or Strabo or the rest who intervene—influential at first, then subdued, then making himself ruler, authorized every possible terrible severity."

After that Lepidus, evidently with the intention of following in their footsteps, instituted a kind of sedition of his own and stirred nearly the whole of Italy. When we at last got rid of him too, remember what we suffered from Sertorius and from the exiles with him. What did Pompey, what did this Caesar himself do?—not to mention here Catiline or Clodius. Did they not at first fight against each other, and that in spite of their relationship, and then fill full of countless evils not only our own city or even the rest of Italy, but practically the entire world? Well, after Pompey's death and that great destruction of the citizens, did any quiet appear? Whence could it? By no means. Africa knows, Spain knows the multitudes who perished in each of those lands. What then? Did we have peace after this? How is it possible, when Caesar himself lies slain in this fashion, the Capitol is occupied, all through the Forum arms are seen, and throughout the city fear exists? [-29-] In this way, when men begin a seditious career and seek ever to repay violence with violence and inflict vengeance without care for propriety, without care for human limitations, but according to their desires and the power that arms give them, there necessarily arises in each such case a kind of circle of ills, and alternate requitals of outrages take place. The fortunate party abounds in insolence and sets no limits to the advantage it may take, and the party that is crushed, if it does not perish immediately, rages at the disaster and is eager to take vengeance on the oppressor, until it sate its wrath. Then the remainder of the multitude, even if it has not been previously involved in the transactions, now through pity of the beaten and envy of the victorious side, cooeperates with the former, fearing that it may suffer the same evils as the downtrodden element and hoping that it may win the same success as the force temporarily in the ascendant. Thus the portion of the citizens that is not concerned is brought into the dispute and one class takes the evil up against another, through pretence of avenging the side which is for the moment at a disadvantage, as if they were repelling a regular, everyday danger; and individually they free themselves from it, but they ruin the community in every way. [-30-] Do you not see how much time we have lost in fighting one another, how many great evils we have endured meanwhile, and, what is worse than that, inflicted? And who could count the vast mass of money of which we have stripped our allies and robbed the gods, which furthermore we have contributed ourselves from what we did not possess, and then expended it against one another? Or who could number the mass of men that have been lost, not only of ordinary persons (that is beyond computation) but of knights and senators, each one of whom was able in foreign wars to preserve the whole city by his life and death? How many Curtii, how many Decii, Fabii, Gracchi, Marcelli, Scipiones have been killed? Not, by Jupiter, to repel Samnites or Latins or Spaniards or Carthaginians, but only to perish themselves in the end. And for those under arms who died, no matter how deep sorrow one might feel for them, there is less reason to lament. They entered the battles as volunteers, if it is proper to call volunteers men compelled by fear, and they met even if an unjust at least a brave death, in an equal struggle; and in the hope that they might even survive and conquer they fell without grieving. But how might one mourn as they deserve those who were pitiably destroyed in their houses, in the roads, in the Forum, in the senate-chamber even, on the Capitol even, by violence—not only men but also women, not only those in their prime, but also old men and children? And after subjecting one another to so many of these reprisals of such a nature as all our enemies put together never inflicted upon us (nor were we ever the authors of anything similar to them), so far from loathing such acts and manfully wishing to have done with them, we rejoice and hold festivals and term those who are guilty of them benefactors. Honestly, I cannot deem this life that we have been leading human; it is rather that of wild beasts which are consumed by one another.

[-31-] "For what is definitely past, however, why should we lament further? We cannot now prevent its having happened. Let us fix our attention upon the future. That is, indeed, the reason why I have been mentioning former events, not for the purpose of giving a list of national calamities which ought never to have occurred, but that by exhibiting them I might persuade you to preserve at least what is left. This is the only benefit one can derive from evils,—to guard against ever again enduring anything similar. This is most within your power at the present moment, while the danger is just beginning, while not many have yet united, and those who are unruly have gained no advantage over one another nor suffered any setback, so that by hope of superiority or anger at inferiority they are led to enter danger heedlessly and contrary to their own interests. Still, in this great work you will be successful without undergoing any toil or danger, without spending money or ordering murders, but simply by voting just this, that no malice shall be borne on the part of any. [-32-] Even if any errors have been committed by certain persons, this is not a time to enquire carefully into them, nor to convict, nor to punish. You are not at the moment sitting in judgment over any one, that you should need to search out what is just with absolute accuracy, but you are deliberating about the situation that has arisen and how the excitement may in the safest way be allayed. This is something we could not bring about, unless we should overlook some few things, as we are wont to do in the case of children. When dealing with them we do not take all matters carefully into account, and many things we of necessity overlook. For venial sins it is not right to chastise them remorselessly, but rather to admonish them gently. And now, since we are not only named fathers of all the people in common, but are in reality such, let us not enter into a discussion of all the fine points, lest we all incur ruin; for anybody could find much fault with Caesar himself so that he would seem to have been justly slain, or again might bring heavy charges against those that killed him, so that they would be thought to deserve punishment. But such action is for men who are anxious to arouse seditions again. It is the task of those who deliberate rightly not to cause their own hurt by meting out exact justice, but to win preservation by a use at the same time of clemency. Accordingly, think of this that has happened as if it had been a kind of hail storm or deluge that had taken place and give it to forgetfulness. Now, if never before, gain a knowledge of one another, since you are countrymen and citizens and relatives, and secure harmony.

[-33-] "Now, that none of you may suspect that I wish to grant any indulgence to Caesar's assassins to prevent their paying the penalty, just because I was once a member of Pompey's party, I will state one fact to you. I think that all of you are firmly of the opinion that I have never adopted an attitude of friendship or hostility toward any one for purely personal reasons, but it was always for your sake and for the public freedom and harmony that I hated the one class and loved the other. For this reason I will pass over the rest that might be said, and make merely a brief statement to you. I am so far from doing this that I mentioned and not looking out for the public safety, that I affirm the others, too, should be granted immunity for their high-handed acts, contrary to established law, in Caesar's lifetime, and they ought to keep the honors, offices, and gifts which they received from him, though I am not pleased with some of them. I should not advise you to do or to grant anything further of the kind: but since it has been done, I think you ought not to be troubled overmuch about any of these matters. For what loss so far-reaching could you sustain if A or B holds something that he has obtained outside of just channels and contrary to his deserts as the benefit you could attain by not causing fear or disturbance to men who were formerly of influence?

"This is what I have to say for the present, in the face of pressing need. When feeling has subsided, let us then consider any remaining subjects of discussion."

[-34-] Cicero by the foregoing speech persuaded the senate to vote that no one should bear malice against any one else. While this was being done the assassins also promised the soldiers that they would not undo any of Caesar's acts. They perceived that the military was mightily ill at ease for fear it should be deprived of what he had given it, and so they made haste, before the senate reached any decision whatever, to anticipate the others' wishes. Next they invited those who were present there down below to come within hearing distance, and conversed with them on matters of importance; as a result of the conference they sent down a letter to the Forum announcing that they would take nothing away from anybody nor do harm in other ways, and that the validity of all acts of Caesar was confirmed. They also urged a state of harmony, binding themselves by the strongest oaths that they would be honest in everything. When, therefore, the decisions of the senate also were made known, the soldiers no longer held to Lepidus nor did the others have any fear of him, but hastened to become reconciled,—chiefly at the instance of Antony,—quite contrary to his intention. Lepidus, making a pretence of vengeance upon Caesar, was anxious to institute a revolution and as he had legions at his command he expected that he would succeed to his position as ruler and gain the mastery; these were his motives in endeavoring to further a conflict. Antony, as he perceived his rival's favorable situation and had not himself any force at his back, did not dare to adopt any revolutionary measures for the time being, and furthermore he persuaded Lepidus (to prevent his becoming greater) to bow to the will of the majority. So they came to terms on the conditions that had been voted, but those on the Capitol would not come down till they had secured the son of Lepidus and the son of Antony to treat as hostages; then Brutus descended to Lepidus, to whom he was related, and Cassius to Antony, being assured of safety. While dining together they naturally, at such a juncture, discussed a variety of topics and Antony asked Cassius: "Have you perhaps got some kind of dagger under your arm even now?" To which he answered: "Yes, and a big one, if you too should desire to play the tyrant."

[-35-]This was the way things went at that time. No damage was inflicted or expected, and the majority were glad to be rid of Caesar's rule, some of them even conceiving the idea of casting his body out unburied. The conspirators well pleased did not undertake any further superfluous tasks and were called "liberators" and "tyrranicides." Later his will was read and the people learned that he had made Octavius his son and heir and had left Antony, Decimus, and some of the other assassins to be the young man's guardians and inheritors of the property in case it should not come to him, and furthermore that he had directed various bequests to be given to different persons, and to the city the gardens along the Tiber, as well as thirty denarii (according to the record of Octavius himself) or seventy-five according to some others, to each of the citizens. This news caused an upheaval and Antony fanned the flames of their resentment by bringing the body most inconsiderately[112] into the Forum and exposing it covered with blood as it was and with gaping wounds. There he delivered over it a speech, in every way beautiful and brilliant but not suited to the state of the public mind at that time. His words were about as follows:—

[-36-] "If this man had died as a private citizen, Quirites, and I had happened to be a private citizen, I should not have needed many words nor have rehearsed all his achievements, but after making a few remarks about his family, his education, and his character, and possibly mentioning some of his services to the state, I should have been satisfied and should have refrained from becoming wearisome to those not related to him. But since this man has perished while holding the highest position among you and I have received and hold the second, it is requisite that I should deliver a twofold address, one as the man set down as his heir and the other in my capacity as magistrate. I must not omit anything that ought to be said but speak what the whole people would have chanted with one tongue if they could have obtained one voice. I am well aware that it is difficult to hit your precise sentiments. Especially is it no easy task to treat matters of such magnitude,—what speech could equal the greatness of the deeds?—and you, whose minds are insatiable because of the facts that you know already, will not prove lenient judges of my efforts. If the speech were being made among men ignorant of the subject, it would be very easy to content them, for they would be startled by such great deeds: but as the matter stands, through your familiarity with the events, it is inevitable that everything that shall be said will be thought less than the reality. Outsiders, even if through jealousy they should distrust it, yet for that very reason must deem each statement they hear strong enough: but your gathering, influenced by good-will, must inevitably prove impossible to satisfy. You yourselves have profited most by Caesar's virtues and you demand his praises not half-heartedly, as if he were no relation, but out of deep affection as one of your very own. I shall strive therefore to meet your wishes to the fullest extent, and I feel sure that you will not criticise too closely my command of words or conception of the subject, but will, out of your kindness of heart, make up whatever is lacking in that respect.

[-37-] "I shall speak first about his lineage, though not because it is very brilliant. Yet this too has considerable bearing on the nature of excellence, that a man should have become good not through force of circumstances but by inherent power. Those not born of noble parents may disguise themselves as honest men but may also some day be convicted of their base origin by innate qualities. Those, however, who possess the seed of honesty, descending through a long line of ancestors, cannot possibly help having an excellence which is of spontaneous growth and permanent. Still, I do not now praise Caesar chiefly because he was sprung from many noble men of recent times and kings and gods of ancient days, but because in the first place he was a kinsman of our whole city,—we were founded by the men that were his ancestors,—and secondly because he not only confirmed the renown of his forefathers who were believed by virtue to have attained divinity, but actually increased it; if any person disputed formerly the possibility of Aeneas ever having been born of Venus, he may now believe it. The gods in past times have been reported as possessing some unworthy children, but no one could deem this man unworthy to have had gods for his ancestors. Aeneas himself became king, as likewise some of his descendants. This man proved himself so much superior to them that whereas they were monarchs of Lavinium and Alba, he refused to become king of Rome; and whereas they laid the foundation of our city, he raised it to such heights that among other services he established colonies greater than the cities over which they ruled.

[-38-] "Such, then, is the state of his family. That he passed through a childhood and education corresponding to the dignity of his noble birth how could one feel better assured than by the certain proofs that his deeds afford? When a man possesses conspicuously a body that is most enduring and a soul that is most steadfast in the face of all contingencies alike of peace and war, is it not inevitable that he must have been reared in the best possible way? And I tell you it is difficult for any man surpassingly beautiful to show himself most enduring, and difficult for one who is strong in body to attain greatest prudence, but most difficult of all for the same man to shine both in words and in deeds. Now this man—I speak among men who know the facts, so that I shall not falsify in the least degree, for I should be caught in the very act, nor heap up exaggerated praises, for then I should obtain the opposite results of what I wish. If I do anything of the kind, I shall be suspected with the utmost justice of braggadocio, and it will be thought that I am making his excellence less than the reputation which already exists in your own minds. Every utterance delivered under such conditions, in case it admits even the smallest amount of falsehood, not only bestows no praise on its subject but defeats its own ends. The knowledge of the hearers, not agreeing with the fictitious declaration, takes refuge in truth, where it quickly finds satisfaction and learns as well what the statement ought to have been; and then, comparing the two, detects the difference. Stating only the truth, therefore, I affirm that this Caesar was at the same time most able in body and most amiable in spirit. He enjoyed a wonderful natural talent and had been scrupulously trained in every kind of education, which always enabled him (not unnaturally) to comprehend everything that was needed with the greatest keenness, to interpret the need most plausibly, and to arrange and administer matters most prudently. No shifting of a favorable situation could come upon him so suddenly as to catch him off his guard, nor did a secret delay, no matter how long the postponement, escape his notice. He decided always with regard to every crisis before he came in contact with it, and was prepared beforehand for every contingency that could happen to him. He understood well how to discern sharply what was concealed, to dissimulate what was evident in such a way as to inspire confidence, to pretend to know what was obscure, to conceal what he knew, to adapt occasions to one another and to give an account of them, and furthermore to accomplish and cover successfully in detail the ground of every enterprise. [-39-] A proof of this is that in his private affairs he showed himself at once an excellent manager and very liberal, being careful to keep permanently what he inherited, but lavish in spending with an unsparing hand what he gained, and for all his relatives, except the most impious, he possessed a strong affection. He did not neglect any of them in misfortune, nor did he envy them in good fortune, but he helped the latter to increase their previous property and made up the deficiencies for the former, giving some money, some lands, some offices, some priesthoods. Again, he was wonderfully attached to his friends and other associates. He never scorned or insulted any one of them, but while courteous to all alike he rewarded many times over those who assisted him in any project and won the devotion of the rest by benefits, not bowing to any one of brilliant position, nor humiliating any one who was bettering himself, but as if he himself were being exalted through all their successes and acquiring strength and adornment he took delight in making the largest number equal with himself. While he behaved thus toward his friends and acquaintances, he did not show himself cruel or inexorable even to his enemies, but many of those who had come into collision with him personally he let off scotfree, and many who had actually made war against him he released, giving some of them honors and offices. To this degree was he in every way inclined to right conduct, and not only had no baseness in his own making, but would not believe that it was found in anybody else.

[-40-] "Since I have reached these statements, I will begin to speak about his public services. If he had lived a quiet existence, perhaps his excellence would never have come to light; but as it was, by being raised to the highest position and becoming the greatest not only of his contemporaries but of all the rest who had ever wielded any influence, he displayed it more conspicuously. For nearly all his predecessors this supreme authority had served only to reveal their defects, but him it made more luminous: through the greatness of his excellence he undertook correspondingly great deeds, and was found to be a match for them; he alone of men after obtaining for himself so great good fortune as a result of true worth neither disgraced it nor treated it wantonly. The brilliant successes which he regularly achieved on his campaigns and the highmindedness he showed in everyday duties I shall pass over, although they are so great that for any other man they would constitute sufficient praise: but in view of the distinction of his subsequent deeds, I shall seem to be dealing with small matters, if I rehearse them all with exactness. I shall only mention his achievements while ruling over you. Even all of these, however, I shall not relate with minute scrupulousness. I could not possibly give them adequate treatment, and I should cause you excessive weariness, particularly since you already know them.

[-41-] "First of all, this man was praetor in Spain, and finding it secretly hostile did not allow the inhabitants under the protection of the name of peace to develop into foes, nor chose to spend the period of his governorship in quiet rather than to effect what was for the advantage of the nation; hence, since they would not agree to alter their sentiments, he brought them to their senses without their consent, and in doing so so far surpassed the men who had previously won glory against them as keeping a thing is more difficult than acquiring it, and reducing men to a condition where they can never again become rebellious is more profitable than rendering them subject in the first place, while their power is still undiminished. That is the reason that you voted him a triumph for this and gave him at once the office of consul. As a result of your decree it became most plainly evident that he had waged that war not for his own desires or glory, but was preparing for the future. The celebration of the triumph he waived on account of pressing business, and after thanking you for the honor he was satisfied with merely that to secure his glory, and entered upon the consulship. [-42-] Now all his administrative acts in this city during the discharge of that office would be verily countless to name. And as soon as he had left it and been sent to conduct war against the Gauls, notice how many and how great were his achievements there. So far from causing grievances to the allies he even went to their assistance, because he was not suspicious at all of them and further saw that they were wronged. But his foes, both those dwelling near the friendly tribes, and all the rest that inhabited Gaul he subjugated, acquiring at one time vast stretches of territory and at another unnumbered cities of which we knew not even the names before. All this, moreover, he accomplished so quickly, though he had received neither a competent force nor sufficient money from you, that before any of you knew that he was at war he had conquered; and he settled affairs on such a firm basis and [113] ..., that as a result Celtica and Britain felt his footstep. And now is that Gaul enslaved which sent against us the Ambrones and the Cimbri, and is entirely cultivated like Italy itself. Ships traverse not only the Rhone or the Arar, but the Mosa, the Liger, the very Rhine, and the very ocean. Places of which we had not even heard the titles to lead us to think that they existed were likewise subdued for us: the formerly unknown he made accessible, the formerly unexplored navigable by his greatness of purpose and greatness of accomplishment. [-43-] And had not certain persons out of envy formed a faction against him, or rather us, and forced him to return here before the proper time, he would certainly have subdued Britain entire together with the remaining islands surrounding it and all of Celtica to the Arctic Ocean, so that we should have had as borders not land or people for the future, but air and the outer sea. For these reasons you also, seeing the greatness of his mind and his deeds and good fortune, assigned him the right to hold office a very long time,—a privilege which, from the hour that we became a democracy has belonged to no other man,—I mean holding the leadership during eight whole years in succession. This shows that you thought him to be really winning all those conquests for you and never entertained the suspicion that he would strengthen himself to your hurt.

"No, you desired that he should spend in those regions as long a time as possible. He was prevented, however, by those who regarded the government as no longer a public but their own private possession, from subjugating the remaining countries, and you were kept from becoming lords of them all; these men, making an ill use of the opportunity given them by his being occupied, ventured upon many impious projects, so that you came to require his aid. [-44-] Therefore abandoning the victories within his grasp he quickly brought you assistance, freed all Italy from the dangers in which it had become involved, and furthermore won back Spain which had been estranged. Then he saw Pompey, who had abandoned his fatherland and was setting up a kingdom of his own in Macedonia, transferring thither all your possessions, equipping your subjects against you, and using against you money of your own. So at first he wished to persuade Pompey somehow to stop and change his course and receive the greatest pledges that he should again attain a fair and equal position with him; and he sent to him both privately and publicly. When, however, he found himself unable in any way to effect this, but Pompey burst all restraints, even the relationship that had existed between himself and Caesar, and chose to fight against you, then at last he was compelled to begin a civil war. And what need is there of telling how daringly he sailed against him in spite of the winter, or how boldly he assailed him, though Pompey held all the strong positions there, or how bravely he vanquished him though much inferior in number of soldiers? If a man wished to examine each feature in detail, he might show the renowned Pompey to have been a child, so completely was he outgeneraled at every point.

[-45-] "But this I will omit, for Caesar himself likewise never took any pride in it, but he accepted it as a dispensation of destiny, repugnant to him personally. When Heaven had most justly decided the issue of the battle, what man of those then captured for the first time did he put to death? Whom, rather, did he not honor, not alone senators or knights or citizens in general, but also allies and subjects? No one of them either died a violent death, or was made defendant in court, no individual, no king, no tribe, no city. On the contrary, some arrayed themselves on his side, and others at least obtained immunity with honor, so that then all lamented the men that had been lost. Such exceeding humanity did he show, that he praised those who had cooeperated with Pompey and allowed them to keep everything the latter had given them, but hated Pharnaces and Orodes, because though friends of the vanquished they had not assisted him. It was chiefly for this reason that he not long after waged war on Pharnaces, and was preparing to conduct a campaign against Orodes. He certainly [would have spared] even [Pompey himself if] he had captured him alive.[114] A proof of this is that he did not pursue him at once, but allowed him to flee at his leisure. Also he was grieved to hear of Pompey's death and did not praise his murderers, but put them to death for it soon after, and even destroyed besides Ptolemy himself, though a child, because he had allowed his benefactor to perish.

[-46-] "How after this he brought Egypt to terms and how much money he conveyed to you from there it would be superfluous to relate. And when he made his campaign against Pharnaces, who already held considerable of Pontus and Armenia, he was on the same day reported to the rebel as approaching him, was seen confronting him, engaged in conflict with him, and conquered him.

"This better than anything else established the truth of the assertion that he had not become weaker in Alexandria and had not delayed there out of voluptuousness. For how could he have won that victory so easily without employing a great store of insight and great force? When now Pharnaces had fled he was preparing to conduct a campaign at once against the Parthian, but as certain quarrels were taking place there he withdrew rather unwillingly, but settled this dispute, too, so that no one would believe there had been a disturbance. Not a soul was killed or exiled or even dishonored in any way as a result of that trouble, not because many might not justly have been punished, but because he thought it right while destroying enemies unsparingly to preserve citizens, even if they were poor stuff. Therefore by his bravery he overcame foreigners in war, but out of his humanity kept unharmed the seditious citizens, although many of them by their acts had often shown themselves unworthy of this favor. This same policy he followed again both in Africa and in Spain, releasing all who had not before been captured and been made recipients of his mercy. To grant their lives invariably to such as frequently plotted against him he deemed folly, not humanity. On the other hand, he thought it quite the duty of a manly man to pardon opponents on the occasion of their first errors and not to keep an inexorable anger, yes, and to assign honors to them, but if they clung to their original course, to get rid of them. Yet why did I say this? Many of them also he preserved by allowing all his associates and those who had helped him conquer to save, one each, the life of a captive.

[-47-] "Moreover, that he did all this from inherent excellence and not from pretence or to gather any advantage, as others in large numbers have displayed humaneness, the greatest evidence is that everywhere and under all circumstances he showed himself the same: anger did not brutalize him nor good fortune corrupt him; power did not alter, nor authority change him. Yet it is very difficult when tested in so many enterprises of such a scope and following one another in quick succession at a time when one has been successful in some, is still engaged in conducting others, and only suspects the existence of others, to prove equally efficient on all occasions and to refrain from wishing to do anything harsh or frightful, if not out of vengeance for the past, at least as a measure of safeguard for the future. This, then, is enough to prove his excellence. He was so truly a scion of gods that he understood but one thing, to save those that could be saved. But if you want more evidence, it lies in this, that he took care to have those who warred against him chastised by no other hands than his own, and that he won back those who in former times had slipped away. He had amnesty granted to all who had been followers of Lepidus and Sertorius, and next arranged that safety should be afforded all the survivors among those proscribed by Sulla; somewhat later he brought them home from exile and bestowed honors and offices upon the children of all who had been slain by that tyrant. Greatest of all, he burned absolutely every one of the letters containing secret information that was found in the tent of either Pompey or Scipio, not reading or noticing any portion of them, in order that no one else might derive from them the power to play the rogue. That this was not only what he said, but what he did, his acts show clearly. No one as a result of those letters was even frightened, let alone suffering any great calamity. And no one knows those who escaped this danger except the men themselves. This is most astonishing and has nothing to surpass it, that they were spared before being accused, and saved before encountering danger, and that not even he who saved their lives learned who it was he pitied.

[-48-] "For these and all his other acts of lawmaking and reconstruction, great in themselves, but likely to be deemed small in comparison with those others into which one cannot enter minutely, you loved him as a father and cherished him as a benefactor, you glorified him with such honors as you bestowed on no one else and desired him to be continual head of the city and of the whole domain. You did not dispute at all about titles, but applied them all to him as being still less than his merits, with the purpose that whatever was lacking in each one of them of what was considered a proper expression of the most complete honor and authority might be made up by what the rest contributed. Therefore, as regards the gods he was appointed high priest, as regards us consul, as regards the soldiers imperator, and as regards the enemy dictator. But why do I enumerate these details, when in one phrase you called him father of his country,—not to mention the rest of his titles?

[-49-] "Yet this father, this high priest, this inviolable being, hero, god, is dead, alas, dead not by the violence of some disease, nor exhausted by old age, nor wounded abroad somewhere in some war, nor snatched away irresistibly by some supernatural force: but plotted against here within the walls—the man that safely led an army into Britain; ambushed in this city—the man who had increased its circuit; struck down in the senate-house—the man that had reared another such edifice at his own charge; unarmed the brave warrior; defenceless the promoter of peace; the judge beside the court of justice; the governor beside the seat of government; at the hands of the citizens—he whom none of the enemy had been able to kill even when he fell into the sea; at the hands of his comrades—he who had often taken pity on them. Where, Caesar, was your humaneness, where your inviolability, where the laws? You enacted many laws to prevent any one's being killed by personal foes, yet see how mercilessly your friends killed you, and now slain you lie before us in that Forum through which you often crowned led triumphal marches, wounded unto death you have been cast down upon that rostra from which you often addressed the people. Woe for the blood-bespattered locks of gray, alas for the rent robe, which you assumed, it seems, only to the end that you might be slain in it!"

[-50-] At this deliverance of Antony's the throng was at first excited, then enraged, and finally so inflamed with passion that they sought his murderers and reproached the senators besides, because the former had killed and the latter had beheld without protest the death of a man in whose behalf they had voted to offer yearly prayers, by whose Health and Fortune they took oaths, and whom they had made sacrosanct equally with the tribunes. Then, seizing his body, some wished to convey it to the room in which he had been slaughtered, and others to the Capitol and to burn it there: but being prevented by the soldiers, who feared that the theatres and temples would be burned to the ground at the same time, they placed it upon a pyre there in the Forum, just as they were. Even under these circumstances many of the surrounding buildings would have been destroyed, had not the soldiers presented an obstacle, and some of the bolder spirits the consuls forced over the cliffs of the Capitol. For all that the remainder did not cease their disturbance, but rushed to the houses of the murderers, and during the excitement they killed without reason Helvius Cinna, a tribune, and some others; this man had not only not plotted against Caesar, but was one of his most devoted friends. Their error was due to the fact that Cornelius Cinna the praetor had a share in the attack. [-51-] After this the consuls forbade any one outside the ranks of soldiers to carry arms. They accordingly refrained from assassinations, but set up a kind of altar on the site of the pyre—his bones the freedmen had previously taken up and deposited in the ancestral tomb—and undertook to sacrifice upon it and offer victims to Caesar, as to a god. This the consuls overturned and punished some who showed displeasure at the act, also publishing a law that no one should ever again be dictator. In fact they invoked curses and proclaimed death as the penalty upon any man who should propose or support such a measure, and furthermore they fined the present malcontents directly. In making this provision for the future they seemed to assume that the shamefulness of the deeds consisted in the names, whereas these occurrences really arose from the supremacy of arms and the character of each individual, and degraded the titles of authority in whatever capacity exercised. For the time being they despatched immediately to the colonies such as held allotments of land previously assigned by Caesar; this was from fear that they might cause some disturbance. Of Caesar's slayers they sent out some, who had obtained governorships, to the provinces, and the rest to various different places on one pretext or another: and these persons were honored by many persons as benefactors.

[-52-] In this way Caesar disappeared from the scene. Inasmuch as he had been slain in Pompey's edifice and near his statue which at that time stood there, he seemed in a way to have afforded his rival his revenge; and this idea gained ground from the fact that tremendous thunder and a furious rain occurred. In the midst of that excitement there also took place the following incident, not unworthy of mention. One Gaius Casca, a tribune, seeing that Cinna had perished as a result of his name being similar to the praetor's, and fearing that he too might be killed, because Publius Servilius Casca was one of the tribunes and also one of the assassins, issued a book which showed that they had in common only one and the same name and pointed out their difference of disposition. Neither of them suffered any harm (for Servilius was strongly guarded) and Gaius won some consideration, so that he is remembered by this act.

[-53-] These were the proceedings, at that time, of the consuls and the rest. Dolabella was invested with his office by Antony, who feared that he might cause a sedition, although he was at first not disposed to take such action, on the ground that Dolabella had not yet the right to it. When, however, the excitement subsided, and Antony himself was charged with investigating the acts of Caesar's administration and carrying out all the latter's behests, he no longer kept within bounds. As soon as he had got hold of the dead man's documents, he made many erasures, and many substitutions,—inserting laws as well as other matter. Moreover, he deprived some of money and offices, which in turn he gave to others, pretending that in so doing he was carrying out Caesar's directions. Next he made many seizures on the spot, and collected large sums of money from individuals, peoples and kings, selling to some land, to others liberty, to others citizenships, to others exemption from taxes. This was done in spite of the fact that the senate at first had voted that no tablet should be set up on account of any contract that Caesar had made (all such transactions were inscribed on bronze tablets), and later, when Antony persisted, declaring that many urgent matters had been provided for by his chief, it had ordered that all the foremost citizens should join in passing upon them. He, however, paid no attention to this, and had an utter contempt for Octavius, who as a stripling and inexperienced in business had declined the inheritance because it was troublesome and hard to manage: and Antony himself, assuming to be the heir not only of the property but also of the supremacy of Caesar, managed everything. One of his acts was to restore some exiles. And since Lepidus had great power and caused him considerable fear, he gave his daughter in marriage to this leader's son and made arrangements to have the latter appointed high priest, so as to prevent any meddling with enterprises which he had on foot. In order to carry out this plan with greater ease, he diverted the choice of high priest from the people back to the priests, and in company with the latter he consecrated him, performing few or none of the accustomed rites, though he might have secured the priesthood for himself.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1: As far as chapter 20 this argument of Leunclavius will be found to follow a different division of Book Thirty-six from that adopted by Melber and employed in the present translation.]

[Footnote 2: His death occurred early in the year.]

[Footnote 3: This man's name is given as Sextilius by Plutarch (Life of Lucullus, chapter 25) and Appian (Mithridatic Wars, chapter 84).]

[Footnote 4: Cobet's (Greek: metepepempto) in place of Vat. A (Greek: metepempeto).]

[Footnote 5: "Valerians" was a name given to the Twentieth Legion. (See Livy VI, 9.)]

[Footnote 6: Q. Marcius Rex.]

[Footnote 7: The subject must be Quintus Caecilius Metellus. This is the point at which the Medicean manuscript (see Introduction) now begins, and between what goes before and what follows there is an obvious gap of some kind. A few details touching upon the close of the Cretan war may be found in Xiphilinus (p. 1, 12-20), as follows:

"And [Metellus] subjugated the entire island, albeit he was hindered and restrained by Pompey the Great, who was now lord of the whole sea and of the mainland for a three days' march from the coast; for Pompey asserted that the islands also belonged to him. Nevertheless, in spite of Pompey's opposition, Metellus put an end to the Cretan war, conducted a triumph in memory thereof, and was given the title of Creticus."

It should be noted in passing that J. Hilberg (Zeitschrift f. oest. Gymn., 1889, p. 213) thinks that the proper place for the chapter numbered 16 is after 17, instead of before it.]

[Footnote 8: A leaf is here torn out of the first quaternion of the Medicean MS. An idea of the matter omitted may be gained by comparing Xiphilinus (p. 5):—"Catulus, one of the foremost men, had said to the populace: 'If he fail after being sent out on this errand (as not infrequently happens in many contests, especially on the sea) whom else will you find in place of him for still more pressing business?' Thereat the entire throng as if by previous agreement lifted their voices and exclaimed: 'You!' Thus Pompey secured command of the sea and of the islands and of the mainland for four hundred etades inland from the sea."]

[Footnote 9: Some half dozen words are wanting at this point in the MS. Those most easily supplied afford the translation here given.]

[Footnote 10: I.e., "City of Victory."]

[Footnote 11: Harmastica (==arx dei Armazi) is meant.]

[Footnote 12: The words [Greek: tou Kurnou pararreontos, enthen de], required to fill a gap in the sense, supplied by Bekker on the basis of a previous suggestion by Reiske.]

[Footnote 13: The words [Greek: ho de Pompeios] at the opening of chapter 6 were supplied by Bekker.]

[Footnote 14: Properly called Sinoria.]

[Footnote 15: A gap exists in the Medicean MS. because the first leaf in the third quaternion is lacking. The omission may be partly filled out from Xiphilinus (p. 7):

"He returned from Armenia and arbitrated disputes besides conducting other business for kings and potentates who came to him. He confirmed some in possession of their kingdoms, added to the principalities of others, and curtailed and humbled the excessive powers of a few. Hollow Syria and Phoenicia which had lately ridden themselves of their rulers and had been made the prey of the Arabians and Tigranes were united. Antiochus had dared to ask them back, but he did not secure them. Instead, they were combined into one province and received laws so that their government was carried on in the Roman fashion."

As to the words at the end of chapter 7, "although her child was with," an inkling of their significance may be had from Appian, Mithridates, chapter 107. Stratonice had betrayed to Pompey a treasurehouse on the sole condition that if he should capture Xiphares, a favorite son of hers, he should spare him. This disloyalty to Mithridates enraged the latter, who gained possession of the youth and slew him, while the mother beheld the deed of revenge from a distance.]

[Footnote 16: L. Annius Bellienus.]

[Footnote 17: L. Luscius.]

[Footnote 18: Or "and these were" (according to the MS. reading selected).]

[Footnote 19: Xiphilinus adds: "after approaching and offering him this."]

[Footnote 20: I.e., Jehovah.]

[Footnote 21: Sol and Luna: or the sun and moon. The words appear in the text without any article and may be personified.]

[Footnote 22: Dio attempts in chapters 18 and 19 to explain why the days of the week are associated with the names of the planets. It should be borne in mind that the order of the planets with reference to their distance from the earth (counting from farthest to nearest) is as follows: Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Sun, Venus, Mercury, Moon. The custom of naming the days may then have arisen, he says, (1) by regarding the gods as originally presiding over separate days assigned by the principle of the tetrachord (I.e., skipping two stars in your count each time as you go over the list) so that you get this order: the day of Saturn, of the Sun, of the Moon, of Mars, of Mercury, of Jupiter, of Venus (Saturday to Friday, inclusive); or (2) by regarding the gods as properly gods of the hours, which are assigned in order, beginning with Saturn, as in the list above,—and allowing it to be understood that that god who is found by this system to preside over the first hour shall also give his name to the day in question.]

[Footnote 23: See Book Thirty-six, chapter 43.]

[Footnote 24: After "join him" there is a gap in the MS. The words necessary to complete this sentence and to begin the next were supplied by Reiske.]

[Footnote 25: Cobet (Mnemosyne N.S., X, p. 195) thinks that there is here a reminiscence of Cicero, Ad Atticum, I, 16, 5.]

[Footnote 26: Or Solo (according to the Epitome of the one hundred and third Book of Livy).]

[Footnote 27: Supplying [Greek: to misein] (as v. Herwerden, Boissevain).]

[Footnote 28: The following sentence: "For these reasons, then, he had both united them and won them over" is probably an explanatory insertion, made by some copyist. (So Bekker.)]

[Footnote 29: Reading [Greek: proskatastanton] (as Boissevain).]

[Footnote 30: The reading here has been subjected to criticism (compare Naber in Mnemosyne, XVI, p. 109), but see Cicero, De Lege Agraria 2, 9, 24 and Mommsen, Staatsrecht, I^2, 468, 3.]

[Footnote 31: The words [Greek: epeidae outoi] are supplied here by Reiske.]

[Footnote 32: In regard to this matter see Mnemosyne N.S. XIX, p. 106, note 2. The article in question is by I.M.J. Valeton, who agrees with Mommsen's conclusions (Staatsrecht, III, p. 1058, note 2).]

[Footnote 33: Reading [Greek: pote] with Boissevain. There is apparently a reference to the year B.C. 100, and to the refusal of Metellus Numidicus to swear to the lex Appuleia.]

[Footnote 34: Following Reiske's arrangement: [Greek: os mentoi ae aemera aechen, en emellon ...].]

[Footnote 35: The verb is supplied by Reiske.]

[Footnote 36: Following Reiske's reading: [Greek: ae ina ta mellonta cholotheiae]]

[Footnote 37: Gaps in the text supplied by Reiske.]

[Footnote 38: Gaps in the text supplied by Reiske.]

[Footnote 39: Gaps in the text supplied by Reiske.]

[Footnote 40: Gaps in the text supplied by Reiske.]

[Footnote 41: The suggestion of Boissevain (euthus) or of Mommsen (authicha) is here adopted in preference to the MS. authis (evidently erroneous).]

[Footnote 42: Verb supplied by Xylander.]

[Footnote 43: Or five hundred miles, since Dio reckons a mile as equivalent to seven and one-half instead of eight stades.]

[Footnote 44: The MS. is corrupt. Perhaps Hannibal is meant, perhaps Aeneas.]

[Footnote 45: Reading [Greek: epithumian] (with Boissevain).]

[Footnote 46: Reading [Greek: enaellonto], proposed in Mnemosyne N.S. X, p. 196, by Cobet, who compares Caesar's Gallic War I, 52, 5; and adopted by Boissevain.]

[Footnote 47: Two words to fill a gap are suggested by Bekker.]

[Footnote 48: Four words to fill a gap supplied by Reiske.]

[Footnote 49: Reading [Greek: paraen] (as Boissevain).]

[Footnote 50: Words equivalent to "the more insistent" are easily supplied from the context, as suggested by v. Herwerden, Wagner, and Leunclavius.]

[Footnote 51: This is a younger brother of that Ptolemy Auletes who was expelled from Egypt and subsequently restored (see chapter 55), and is the same one mentioned in Book Thirty-eight, chapter 30.]

[Footnote 52: This statement of Dio's appears to be erroneous. See Cicero, Ad Familiares I, 7, 10, and Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 22, 672.]

[Footnote 53: Gap in the MS. supplied by Bekker's conjecture.]

[Footnote 54: Suetonius says "five years" (Life of Caesar, chapter 24), and Plutarch and Appian make a similar statement of the time. (Plutarch, Caesar, chapter 21, and Pompey, chapters 51, 52. Appian, Civil War, II, 17.)]

[Footnote 55: The two kinds of naval tactics mentioned here (Greek: periplous] and [Greek: diechplous]) consist respectively (1) in describing a semi-circle and making a broadside attack with the purpose of ramming an opposing vessel, and (2) in dashing through the hostile ranks, breaking the oars of some ship and then returning to ram it when disabled. Both methods were employed in early Greek as well as in Roman warfare.]

[Footnote 56: Dio has evidently imitated at this point a sentence in Herodotos, VIII, 6 (as shown by the phraseology), where it is remarked that "the Persians [at Artemisium] were minded not to let a single soul" of the Greeks escape. The expression is, in general, a proverbial one, applied to utter destruction, especially in warfare. Its source is Greek, and lies in the custom of the Spartans (see Xenophon, Polity of the Lacedaemonians, chapter 13, section 2), which required the presence in their army of a priest carrying fire kindled at the shrine of Zeus the Leader, in Sparta, this sacred fire being absolutely essential to the proper conduct of important sacrifices. Victors would naturally spare such a priest on account of his sacred character; he regularly possessed the inviolability attaching also to heralds and envoys: and the proverb that represents him as being slain is (as Suidas notes) an effective bit of epigrammatic exaggeration. Other references to this proverb may be found (by those interested) in Rawlinson's note on the above passage of Herodotos, in one of the scholia on the Phoenician Maidens of Euripides (verse 1377), in Sturz's Xenophontean Lexicon, in Stobaios's Florilegium (XLIV, 41, excerpt from Nicolaos in Damascenos), in Zenobios's Centuria (V, 34), and finally in the dictionaries of Suidas and Hesychios.

The following slight variations as to the origin of the phrase are to be found in the above. The scholiast on Euripides states that in early times before the trumpet was invented, it was customary for a torch-bearer to perform the duties of a trumpeter. Each of any two opposing armies would have one, and the two priests advancing in front of their respective armies would cast their torches into the intervening space and then be allowed to retire unmolested before the clash occurred. Zenobios, a gatherer of proverbs, uses the word "seer" instead of priest. That the saying was an extremely common one seems to be indicated by the rather naive definition of Hesychios: Fire-Bearer. The man bearing fire. Also, the only man saved in war.

Of course, this may be simply the unskillful condensation of an authority.]

[Footnote 57: Reading [Greek: autas] (as Boissevain) in preference to [Greek: autous] ("upon them").]

[Footnote 58: About sixty miles. It is interesting to compare here Caesar's (probably less accurate) estimate of thirty miles in his Gallic War (V, 2, 3).]

[Footnote 59: The exact time, daybreak, is indicated in Caesar's Gallic War, V, 31, 6.]

[Footnote 60: Compare Caesar's Gallic War, V, 54, 1.]

[Footnote 61: cp. LXXX, 3.]

[Footnote 62: Verb supplied by Reiske.]

[Footnote 63: "Zeugma" signifies a "fastening together" (of boats or other material) to make a bridge.]

[Footnote 64: A gap here is filled by following approximately Bekker's conjecture.]

[Footnote 65: Verb supplied by Oddey.]

[Footnote 66: Twenty days according to Caesar's Gallic War (VII, 90). Reimar thinks "sixty" an error of the copyists.]

[Footnote 67: The Words "of Marcus" were added by Leunclavius to make the statement of the sentence correspond with fact. Their omission would seem to be obviously due to haplography. The confusion about the relationship which might well have arisen by Dio's time, is very possibly the consequence of the idiomatic Latin "frater patruelis" used by Suetonius (for instance) in chapter 29 of his Life of Caesar. The two men were in fact, first cousins. Again in Appian (Civil Wars, Book Two, chapter 26), we read of "Claudius Marcellus, cousin of the previous Marcus." Both had the gentile name Claudius, one being Marcus Claudius, and the other Gaius Claudius, Marcellus.]

[Footnote 68: Small gaps occur in this sentence, filled by conjectures of Bekker and Reiske.]

[Footnote 69: Verb suggested by Xylander, Reiske, Bekker.]

[Footnote 70: Compare Book Thirty-seven, chapter 52.]

[Footnote 71: I.e., "Temple" or "Place of the Nymphs."]

[Footnote 72: This couplet is from an unknown play of Sophocles, according to both Plutarch and Appian. Plutarch, in his extant works, cites it three times (Life of Pompey, chapter 78; Sayings of Kings and Emperors, p. 204E; How a Young Man Ought to Hear Poems, chapter 12). In the last of these passages he tells how Zeno by a slight change in the words alters the lines to an opposite meaning which better expresses his own sentiments. Diogenes Laertius (II, 8) relates a similar incident. Plutarch says that Pompey quoted the verses in speaking to his wife and son, but Appian (Civil Wars, H, 85) that he repeated to himself.

The verses will be found as No. 789 of the Incertarum Fabularum Fragmenta in Nauck's Tragici Graeci.]

[Footnote 73: M. Acilius Caninus.]

[Footnote 74: In the MS, some corruption has jumbled these names together. The correct interpretation was furnished by Xylander and Leunclavius.]

[Footnote 75: The year 47, in which Caesar came to Rome, is here meant, or else Dio has made an error.]

[Footnote 76: M. Caelius Rufus.]

[Footnote 77: This is one of some twenty different phases (listed in Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Roemer, p. 212) under which the goddess was worshipped. (See also Roscher 1, col. 1513.) The appropriate Latin title was Fortuna Respiciens, and it certainly had a Greek equivalent ([Greek: Tuoae hepistrephomenae] in Plutarch, de fortuna Romanorum, c. 10) which it seems strange that Dio should not have known. Moreover, our historian has apparently given a wrong interpretation of the name, since respicio in Latin, when used of the gods, commonly means to "look favorably upon." In Plautus's Captivi (verse 834) there is a play on the word respice involving the goddess, and in his Asinaria (verse 716) mention is made of a closely related divinity, Fortuna Obsequens. Cicero (de legibus, II, 11, 28), in enumerating the divinities that merit human worship, includes "Fortuna, quae est vel Huius diei—nam valet in omnis dies—vel Respiciens ad opem ferendam, vel Fors, in quo incerti casus significantur magis" ... The name Fortuna Respiciens has also come to light in at least three inscriptions.]

[Footnote 78: This is the phrase commonly supplied to explain a palpable corruption in the MS.]

[Footnote 79: It seems probable that a few words have fallen out of the original narrative at this point. Such is the opinion of both Dindorf and Hoelzl.]

[Footnote 80: Compare Book Thirty-six, chapters 12 and 13.]

[Footnote 81: I.e., "Citizens."]

[Footnote 82: Xylander and Leunclavius supply this necessary word lacking in the MS.]

[Footnote 83: Compare Plutarch, Life of Caesar, chapter 52, and Suetonius, Life of Caesar, chapter 59.]

[Footnote 84: Better known as the Phaedo.]

[Footnote 85: The Greek word representing "for a second time" is not in the MS., but is supplied with the best of reason by Schenkl and also Cobet (see Mnemosyne N.S.X., p. 196). It was Caesar's regular custom to spare any who were taken captive for the first time, but invariably to put them to death if they were again caught opposing him in arms. References in Dio are numerous: Compare Book 41, chapter 62; Book 43, chapter 17; Book 44, chapter 45; Book 44, chapter 46. The same rule for the treatment of captives finds mention also in the Life of Caesar by Suetonius, chapter 75.]

[Footnote 86: The last three words of this sentence are not found in the MS., but as a correlative clause of contrast is evidently needed to complete the sense, this, or something similar, is supplied by most editors.]

[Footnote 87: Reading [Greek: sunaeranto] with Bekker and Reiske in place of [Greek: prosaeranto].]

[Footnote 88: These blatherskite jests formed a part of the ritual of the triumph, for the purpose of averting the possible jealousy of Heaven. Compare, in general, the interesting description of a triumph given in Fragment 23 (volume VI).]

[Footnote 89: Reading [Greek: haetiazeto] (Cobet's preference).]

[Footnote 90: Caesar's conduct during his stay with Nicomedes (with embellishments) was thrown in his teeth repeatedly during his career. According to Suetonius (Life of Caesar, chapter 49) the soldiers sang scurrilous verses, as follows:

Gallias Caesar subegit, Nicomedes Caesarem. Ecce Caesar nunc triumphat qui subegit Gallias, Nicomedes non triumphat qui subegit Caesarem.

Dio undoubtedly had these verses before him, in either Suetonius or some other work, but seems to have been too slow-witted to appreciate the double entendre in subegit, which may signify voluptuary as well as military prowess. Hence, though he might have turned the expression exactly by [Greek: hupaegageto] he contented himself with the prosaic [Greek: hedoulosato]]

[Footnote 91: This remark (as Cobet pointed out) is evidently a perversion of an old nursery jingle (nenia):

Si male faxis vapulabis, si bene faxis rex eris.

And another form of it is found in Horace, Epistles (I, 1, 59-60):

at pueri ludentes 'rex eris' aiunt 'si recte fades.'

The soldiers simply changed the position of male and bene in the line above cited.]

[Footnote 92: Possibly, Boissevain thinks, this is a corruption for the Furius Leptinus mentioned by Suetonius, Life of Caesar, chapter 39.]

[Footnote 93: At present seven scattered months have thirty-one days. Caesar, when he took the Alexandrian month of thirty days as his standard, found the same discrepancy of five days as did the Egyptians. Besides these he lopped two more days off one particular month, then spread his remainder of seven through the year.]

[Footnote 94: I follow in this sentence the reading of all the older texts as well as Boissevain's. Only Dindorf and Melber omit [Greek: chai tetrachosiois], making the number of years 1061. The usual figuring, 1461, has pertinence: the number is just four times 365-1/4 and was recognized as an Egyptian year-cycle.

As to the facts, however, Sturz points out (note 139 to Book 43) that after the elapse of fourteen hundred and sixty-one years eleven days must be subtracted instead of one day added. Pope Gregory XIII ascertained this when in A.D. 1582 he summoned Aloysius and Antonius Lilius to advise him in regard to the calendar. (Boissee also refers here to Ideler, Manuel de Chronologie, II, 119ff.)]

[Footnote 95: The name of these islands is spelled both Gymnasioe and Gymnesioe, and they are also called Baleares and Pityusoe. Cp. the end of IX, 10, in the transcript of Zonaras (Volume I).]

[Footnote 96: This is of course New Carthage (Karthago Nova), the Spanish colony of the African city.]

[Footnote 97: At the close of this chapter there are undoubtedly certain gaps in the MS., as Dindorf discerned. In the Tauchnitz stereotyped edition, which usually insists upon wresting some sense from such passages either by conjecture or by emendation, the following sentence appears: "But Pompey made light of these supernatural effects, and the war shrank to the compass of a battle." Boissevain (with a suggestion by Kuiper) reads: [Greek: all haege gar to daimonion hen te oligoria auto hepoihaesato chai es polin Moundan pros machaen dae chatestae]. This would mean: "But Heaven, which he had slighted, led his steps, and he took up his quarters in a city called Munda preparatory to battle."]

[Footnote 98: Mommsen in his Roman History (third German edition, p. 627, note 1), remarks that Dio must have confused the son of Bocchus with the son of Massinissa, Arabio, who certainly did align himself with the Pompeian party (Appian, Civil Wars, IV, 54). All other evidence, outside of this one passage, shows the two kings to have been steadfastly loyal to Caesar, behavior which brought them tangible profit in the shape of enlargement of their domains.]

[Footnote 99: I.e., they were in arms against Caesar a second time. Compare the note on chapter 12.]

[Footnote 100: This name is spelled Coesonius in Florus's Epitome of Livy's Thirteenth Book (=Florus II, 13, 86) and also in Orosius's Narratives for the Discomfiture of Pagans (VI, 16, 9), but appears with the same form as here in Cicero's Philippics, XII, 9, 23.]

[Footnote 101: The MS. has only "Fabius and Quintus." Mommsen supplies their entire names from chapter 31 of this book.]

[Footnote 102: This was originally a festival of Pales-Palatua, and information regarding its introduction is intercepted by remote antiquity. In historical times we find it celebrated as the commemoration of the founding of Rome, because Pales-Palatua was a divinity closely connected with the Palatine, where the city first stood. From Hadrian's time on special brilliance attached to the occasion, and it was dignified by the epithet "Roman" (Athenaeus). As late as the fifth century it was still known as "the birthday of the city of Rome." Both forms, Parilia and Palilia occur. (Mentioned also in Book Forty-five, chapter 6.)]

[Footnote 103: Licentiousness and general laxity of morals.]

[Footnote 104: The last clause of this chapter as it appears in the MS. is evidently corrupt. The reading adopted is that of Madvig, modified by Melber.]

[Footnote 105: Verb supplied (to fill MS gap) by R. Stephanus and Leunclavius.]

[Footnote 106: L. Minucius Basilus.]

[Footnote 107: Reading, with Boissevain, [Greek: antecharteraese].]

[Footnote 108: A gap in the MS.—Verb conjectured by Bekker on the analogy of a passage in chapter 53.]

[Footnote 109: The father of Pompey the Great.]

[Footnote 110: In other words, the Lupercalia. The two other colleges of Lupercales to which allusion is made were known as the Quintilian and the Fabian.]

[Footnote 111: Compare Suetonius (Life of Caesar), chapter 52.]

[Footnote 112: It is here, with this word, that one of the two most important manuscripts of Dio (the codex Venetus or Marcianus 395) begins.]

[Footnote 113: Most editors have gotten over the difficulty of this "and" in the MS. by omitting it. Dindorf, however, believed it to indicate a real gap.]

[Footnote 114: The words in brackets are Reiske's conjecture for filling the gap in the MS. Other editors use slightly different phraseology of like purport.]

THE END