"Life of Caesar" Podcast: Episode 7

A million thanks to my friend! She's done so much heavy lifting in this episode (and all the previous ones). I wouldn't be able to write even half of it without her help.

A quick note... The hosts didn't mention the proposal that the children of the proscribed by Sulla should be restored in their political rights. Caesar supported it. Cicero, as consul, opposed it and it fell through.

One more... 63 BC, the year of the Catilinarian affair, is also the year Gaius Octavius (aka Octavian aka Caesar Augustus) is born. Caesar's great-nephew and posthumously adopted son and heir. 

Episode 7:

• 02:50 – Ray: "Cato, as we talked about last time, is prosecuting a lot of the people who were involved in the proscriptions orchestrated by Sulla. . . . So Caesar ends up being the judge in several of those cases. Caesar's just sitting there and Cato's doing all the work."

This is one of several times when Ray says that Cato is the one prosecuting these men. Let's get this clear... Cato is not involved in these cases AT ALL.

And Caesar was iudex quaestionis, as I mentioned in the previous episode.

• 03:30 – Cam: "He [Cato] comes across as being very stern, very moralistic, which was . . . particularly unusual in the Roman Senate in this day. Most of the stories that we have of people basically just being corrupt as all hell. You know, getting governorships of distant lands and just, you know, raping and pillaging the land for their own personal profit. And Cato really stands out as the good guy."

He is also the most bullheaded, self-righteous, close-minded, ultra-conservative hypocrite.

Cato was so blindingly clean that Cam may have missed his hand movements:

"When the liquidation of the royal possessions of Cyprus was complete and the proceeds totaled up, Cato had raised the impressive sum of nearly 7,000 talents. . . . Cato's haul from Cyprus was certainly impressive, but some well-informed senators may have wondered why it was not bigger. . . . Cato was reportedly very distressed that both copies of his account books were destroyed on the journey home: one was lost at sea when a boat capsized, and the other was consumed by a fire that accidentally ignited Cato's tent. While this might be ascribed to bad luck, it was made particularly serious because Cato had failed to obey the law requiring that Roman officials leave one copy of their accounts in the province they were leaving, and forward another copy to the treasury of Rome. He certainly knew of his responsibility to leave a copy in Cyprus, since it was set down in the lex Julia de repetundis, the law that Cato had favored in 59 bc. Such neglect is odd, since Cato was famous for following every law, even those that he disliked. . . . Furthermore, he had the foresight to bring the royal stewards of Cyprus with him to Rome—which was a strange precaution for one not expecting to lose his account books—and they testified to his honesty, although the veracity of their testimony is open to question, since Cato subsequently rewarded at least one of them with his freedom. . . . So the surprising neglect of the law regarding the preservation of accounts, the disappearance of the only two copies of the accounts, and Cato's foresight in bringing persons who could attest to the contents of those lost accounts are certainly suspicious, especially given the extreme care Cato took in making sure the wealth transported on his ships could be recovered even if the ships sank.

Is it possible that the scrupulous Cato embezzled money? It seems impossible if one thinks of him as a paragon of Stoic virtue, but if one understands Cato instead as his own caricature of a traditional Roman, then his willingness to enrich himself modestly through embezzlement does not seem particularly surprising." – Fred K. Drogula

All Roman governors were profiting one way or another. Cato is no exception.

• 04:36 – Cam: "He [Cato] sounds like, you know, one of the few ethical figures."

A guy who would rather block useful and much, much needed legislation just because he doesn't like the person who drafted it?

• 06:49 – Ray: "Caesar was very dispassionate about his own life, even referred to himself in the third person at times to make the best decision about– if something happened to him, which way should he go, which way should Caesar go. Cato is kind of doing the same thing. He's dispassionate . . . no emotions, so he can make the best decision and live his best life."

Hmm... Caesar kept a cool head in times of crisis. But is it the same as being dispassionate about one's life?

How does Ray know that Caesar referred to himself in the third person? Because he wrote the "Commentaries" in the third person? But that was a literary device. In the surviving fragments of his speeches, Caesar refers to himself in the first person.

I have to strongly disagree with this interpretation of Cato. He was all emotion and no reason. There were so many situations where his stubbornness just made things so much worse because he just wouldn't compromise.

• 10:25 – Cam: "And he [Catiline] had a distinguished military career."

What was distinguishing about his military career? He had one, but what was distinguishing about it?

• 11:17 – Ray on the consular elections of 64 BC: "Cicero desperately wants to be consul. There hasn't been a "new man" elected consul in something like a hundred years."

Marius who?

The "new men" elected consuls in the last 100 years:

146 – L. Memmius
141 – Q. Pompeius
107, 104, 103, 102,101, 100, 86 – C. Marius
104 – C. Flavius Fimbria
98 – T. Didius
94 – C. Coelius Caldus

Possibly "new men":

161 – C. Fannius Strabo
160 – L. Anicius Gallus
157 – L. Aurelius Orestes
154 – Q. Opimius
153 – T. Annius Luscus
149 – M'. Manilius
132 – P. Rupilius
130 – M. Perperna

• 11:25 – Ray on Catiline losing the elections: "Catiline should've had this, it should've been his, in the bag. But he just rubbed people the wrong way. I don't know if it was the arrogance or the way he treated people, but there was almost like unspoken understanding and people just did not vote for Catiline."

The optimates threw all their weight behind Cicero against Catiline. Crassus and Caesar supported both Gaius Antonius and Catiline. It helped Antonius, but the optimates resistance to Catiline was too strong to overcome.

• 12:06 – Ray: "So Cicero's finally consul... There hasn't been one in a century. And when we say "new man" that just means none of your ancestors had been consuls before."

Not only have they forgotten Marius, but also what "new man" means. "New man" is someone who is the first in his family to enter the Senate.

• 12:23 – Ray: "Unfortunately, it's not gonna be the year that he [Cicero] thinks it's gonna be. One of the things that he has to deal with... a bunch of land bills, almost like what brothers Gracchi came up with many years ago. And Cicero was against it . . . eventually it's vetoed. But he wanted to do something more exciting as his year as consul. He's gonna get his chance, but it's gonna be at the very end of his consulship."

I like how this implies that Cicero was secretly dreaming of an armed rebellion that he could crush. Savage!

There was only one land bill. And it was a very hot topic, not boring or unexciting in the slightest. For Cicero, it was a chance to prove his worth to the optimates. Not to mention that he personally never approved of the distribution of land to poor citizens and opposed it throughout his life. The Rullan land bill wasn't vetoed. One of the tribunes threatened to veto it, but it never came to that because the bill was dropped due to opposition from the optimates.

Cam and Ray also haven't mentioned that Crassus and Caesar stood behind Rullus.

"Its land-distribution scheme addressed the problems of urban overpopulation and unemployment, problems sorely in need of a remedy. . . . Many of those dispossessed and reduced to poverty by Sulla would presumably receive land under the scheme, and Sullan colonists and possessores would be given the opportunity to sell their holdings in a favorable market or would be confirmed in their possession of them if they had the will and the resources to continue on the land. Several grievances and controversies left over from the Sullan years and some of the current economic distress of rural Italy would thus be lessened, important additional steps in the elimination of the many sources of disunity and unrest in this period. There was obviously a lot to commend in the land law of Rullus, and its attention to so wide a range of issues and the elaborate care and detail with which, in forty articles or more, it set forth proposals for dealing with them entitles it to be considered as a serious effort at genuine reform." – Thomas N. Mitchell

• 14:42 – Cam: "And the conversation between Juba and Caesar became quite heated. And the story that we have is that at one point Caesar reaches over, grabs Prince Juba by the beard. . . . I guess the point of the story is that Caesar maybe at this stage of his career wasn't quite as calmed and measured as he was later on. Maybe still was a little bit, you know, young and temperamental. How old is he at this stage?"
Ray: "Is he in his early 30s?"
Cam: "Yeah, early to mid-30s?"

He is either 37 or 38 (we don't know the exact year of Masintha's case), so not that young. Frankly, we don't know the specifics. Maybe he didn't lose his temper at all, but it was a calculated move to piss off Juba or something.

• 15:42 – Ray: "The reason Juba was there, because kings were not allowed within the pomerium, so the prince had to go."

Not exactly. Up until 167 BC, kings were allowed to visit Rome freely. After the Battle of Pydna, the Senate passed a decree forbidding kings from visiting Rome. But it was most likely repealed later on because we know that Rome was visited by the Numidians kings Adherbal and Jugurtha, Nicomedes IV of Bithynia, Ptolemy Auletes of Egypt, Herod the Great of Judea (he went onto the Capitoline Hill, so he definitely crossed the pomerium), etc.

• 16:05 – Ray: "So even though he [Caesar] lost the case, he took the side that you could say was definitely against the conservatives, against the Senate and he sneaks the man off to freedom. So even though he lost the case his man still got away, because Caesar broke the law and was quite willing, at least at this point, to break the law."

The story of Masintha is unclear. The name is Numidian, and it's been suggested that perhaps he was the son of King Hiarbas. In the 80s BC, Pompey deposed Hiarbas (who was supporting Marians) on Sulla's orders and set up Hiempsal in his place.

The most logical assumption would be that Masintha was in control of some small part of Numidia and was seeking independence from Hiempsal. But the Senate or whomever decided that this territory belongs to Hiempsal and Masintha was declared a tributary to him. In this case, Masintha's claim to independence was seen as an act of treason by Hiempsal and Juba, and they tried to arrest him and send him back to Numidia to prison (or to execute him).

None of our sources say that Masintha was declared to be Hiempsal's slave or that he should be handed over to Hiempsal. So, technically speaking, Caesar wasn't breaking the law. Well, maybe the Numidian ones.

Masintha's perspectives in Numidia were bleak. At best, he would be imprisoned, but most likely executed. So Caesar hid him in his own house and then smuggled him out of Rome to Spain. We don't know what happened to Masintha afterwards, but most likely he lived in exile in Spain. If he was indeed a Numidian aristocrat or even royalty, he was probably receiving some financial support from his friends and allies.

One more thing... When Ray talks about this case (and other cases), he always portrays it as "he's doing it for popularity points." Yes, it was important for Roman politicians to keep their names in public, but Ray completely disregards the patron-client aspect of these trials. Patronage was at the core of Roman society; their entire system was based on it. And all of Caesar's appearances in courts so far were made on behalf of his clients.

• 16:46 – Ray: "He [Labienus] liked to hurt people. Really, really liked to hurt people."

Colleen McCullough again. Labienus was not known to be a likable man, but neither was he known to be a sadist.

• 17:06 – Ray on Labienus going over to Pompey in the civil war: "And his argument is, 'I fought along Caesar. I can beat Caesar. Let me show you.'"

And how does Ray know that Labienus said that?

• 17:29 – Ray: "And Caesar urges Titus Labienus . . . to give Pompey a bunch of honors. . . . He [Caesar] gets a lot of awards for him. . . . He's participating in a lot of other trials. Some of them he wins, some of them he loses."

a) Ray made a similar claim in episode 4, when he said that Caesar was prosecuting "more well-known men," even though Caesar hadn't prosecuted a single man.

Apart from the trials of Piso and Masintha (if the latter was even a trial), Caesar will also serve as a judge in the show trial of Rabirius. And that's all. What "a lot of other trials" did he win/lose?

This goes back to the point I made above. Ray repeatedly multiplies Caesar's court appearances to emphasize that he's only doing them to keep his name in public. But if you actually look at Caesar's court records, he's done only 6 cases in 14 years! Two of them might not have been court cases at all. And all but one were made on behalf of his non-Roman clients.

b) What "a lot of awards"? He only supported Labienus' proposal to give Pompey the right to wear triumphal garments during the games.

• 19:05 – Cam on the trial of Rabirius: "And what's even stranger is the charges relate to something that happened 35 years earlier. . . Back to our probably second episode, we were talking about Saturninus and Glaucia . . . these two guys were consuls, they were murdered. Apparently Rabirius was one of the men, who was part of that action according to the charges brought against him by Labienus. . . . Even though, again, the Senate had already passed during these events the senatus consultum ultimatum. Which basically gave Marius at the time the ultimate power to do whatever he wanted to do, including have these people killed, so there should be no basis for a trial."

a) Saturninus was killed in 100 BC (the year Caesar was born), so that's 37 years ago.

b) Saturninus and Glaucia weren't consuls. Saturninus was tribune and Glaucia was praetor.

c) Senatus consultum ultimum gave magistrates (in this case Marius, who was a consul) the right to use whatever means necessary against Saturninus and Glaucia. But Rabirius wasn't a magistrate, he was a private citizen and acted on his own.

Marius got Saturninus to surrender on the promise of his life and locked him and his supporters in the Senate house to await trial. But some people (one of them was Rabirius) climbed onto the roof and stoned all of them to death.

• 21:08 – Cam on perduellio: "According to this old rule, the person if found guilty was supposed to be– suffer death by crucifixion."

We don't know (despite what wikipedia may tell you) what type of death penalty was fixed for perduellio. In 384 BC, Manlius Capitolinus was thrown off the Tarpeian Rock on the Capitoline Hill. And according to Cicero, Rabirius was supposed to be flogged to death, but it never came to that. That's all we know.

• 25:56 – Cam: "Now, one theory is that this was all staged: they [Caesar and Labienus] were in on the whole thing about the flag being lowered, because they wanted to make a point. They wanted to make a point that in periods when the senatus consultum ultimum was issued by the Senate, basically giving the consul cart blanch to do whatever he needed to do to protect Rome, running around and arbitrary murdering, you know, particularly Romans of high standing, wasn't acceptable and you might get called up on that down the track. Now, why would they do this to make a point? Maybe Caesar also did it just because it seemed like a popular thing to do, retribution against people who did this, even though this happened under the reign of Marius. As we know, Caesar liked to ally himself with the memory of Marius. But there seems to be this idea that they were doing it to make a point, because they suspected that in the future the senatus consultum ultimum will be issued again and it was a way of letting people know 'hey, you just can't go apeshit crazy when this happens, because there could be repercussions'. . . . And also think about it in terms of Caesar's public image. This was, I imagine, this was a pretty extraordinary trial. . . . He would've been making himself the talk of Rome yet again."

a) Marius wasn't involved in the murder of Saturninus. The Senate ordered him to put down the unrest, and he did. He got Saturninus to surrender and locked him up. The people who lynched Saturninus and his supporters were not associated with Marius.

b) Caesar can do it for publicity and be genuinely concerned about how the SCU is implemented. These two things can happily coexist. Like all Roman politicians, Caesar was an opportunist, but (unlike many of them) he was a statesman, and a damn good one at that.

A friendly reminder that every time the SCU had been passed, people were summarily killed left, right, and center (starting with Gaius Gracchus and some 3,000 of his supporters). The Senate is trigger-happy.

"The SCU had absolutely no legal force. It expressed instead the combined weight of senatorial auctoritas and relied on traditional respect for senatorial leadership. As such, when that leadership was contested, the SCU was similarly questioned. . . . [Caesar] became involved in a kind of mock trial, which was designed to make the point that there was absolutely no legal basis to the SCU, and that it did not justify the use of force. The senate should think very carefully about ever using it again in situations of popular challenge that could be dealt with through more conventional political mechanisms and the foregrounding of consensus. . . . The arch-conservatives in the senate had been warned about abusing the senate's power and about the senate's relative standing in relation to the sovereign Roman people. Caesar had yet again taken a stand for consensus politics." – Tom Stevenson

c) I don't think there is any doubt that this was a show trial. To condemn Rabirius was never their aim. They just used him as a means to an end. And the end was to caution against the irresponsible use of the SCU. Sucks for Rabirius, but a few days of neuroses are not the worst punishment for stoning people to death.

• 33:45 – Ray on Caesar running for Pontifex Maximus: "And some people say that his mother Aurelia encouraged him to do this. Not that he couldn't have thought of it on his own. But they have a very interesting relationship. . . Caesar's father died pretty early and so Caesar's mother Aurelia had to be mother and father to him, so she was pretty tough on him. So she kind of treated him without a lot of emotion."

Once again, this is McCullough.

a) "some people say that his mother Aurelia encouraged him to do this"

These are the only mentions of Aurelia in relation to the Pontifex Maximus elections:

"The day of the election came, and Caesar's mother was tearfully seeing him off from the house. He embraced her, and said: 'today, mother, you will see your son either a high-priest or an exile.'" – Plutarch

"He is said to have declared to his mother on the morning of his election, as she kissed him when he was starting for the polls, that he would never return except as pontifex." – Suetonius

b) "So she kind of treated him without a lot of emotion."

Caesar was very close to his mother. I talked about it in episode 5.

• 34:32 – Ray: "And Catulus comes out of nowhere and says, 'Caesar, if you drop out of the race, I will pay off all your debts.'"

He didn't offer to pay off all his debts; he offered a large sum of money.

• 35:34 – Cam: "Servilia, his lover of many, many years."

A reminder that the first record of their relationship dates to this year.

• 36:05 – Ray: "And she [Aurelia] was said to be a very beautiful woman up until very late in life." 

Ray said the same thing in episode 5. Nothing is known about Aurelia's looks!

• 37:15 – Cam: "[Pontifex] basically means 'priest,' I guess. Doesn't it? Pontif. . . . Let me see, 'Pontif' in Latin means, yeah, 'high priest.'"

"PO′NTIFEX. The origin of this word is explained in various ways. Q. Scaevola, who was himself pontifex maximus, derived it from posse [to be able] and facere [to make], and Varro from pons [a bridge], because the pontiffs, he says, had built the Pons Sublicius [the pile-bridge], and afterwards frequently restored it, that it might be possible to perform sacrifices on each side of the Tiber. This statement is, however, contradicted by the tradition which ascribes the building of the Pons Sublicius to Ancus Martius, at a time when the pontiffs had long existed and borne this name. Göttling thinks that pontifex is only another form for pompifex, which would characterise the pontiffs only as the managers and conductors of public processions and solemnities. But it seems far more probable that the word is formed from pons and facere (in the signification of the Greek ῥέζειν, to perform a sacrifice), and that consequently it signifies the priests who offered sacrifices upon the bridge." – William Smith

Translations in square brackets are by my friend.

• 37:46 – Ray: "What was interesting about the Pontifex Maximus . . . there were no restrictions. Caesar could be the Pontifex, he could still have a military career, he could still have political career."

They forgot this later on. In episode 3 of "Life of Augustus," they claim that Caesar broke all the rules as Pontifex Maximus, and I'm like, "What rules?"

• 39:23 – Cam: "Marcus Lucius Brutus."

When Cam called him Lucius in episode 3, I thought it was a slip. Now it seems like a genuine mistake. His name is Marcus Junius Brutus.

• 40:04 – Cam: "Was Cicero wealthy?"
Ray: "When he was a lawyer or advocate, he couldn't be paid in cash. He had to be paid in works of art. His wife had a lot of money, but he did not and he was not allowed to touch his wife's money, 'cause she was that kind of woman. No, he was not rich as far as cash goes."

McCullough again.

Cam and Ray have this strange need to portray everyone as poor. Now it's Cicero's turn.

a) For his oratorical services, Cicero could be awarded with shares in the wills (he acquired a lot of money that way), or buy property at a knocked-down price, or receive shares out of profits from provincial governorships, or receive gifts and presents (the cost of his aedileship was reduced through the gifts from Sicilians), etc.

b) While he was married, he could use his wife's dowry and profit from it. For example, Cicero owned two insulae on the Aventine and the Argiletum through his wife's dowry.

Cicero was fine!

• 43:18 – Ray on Catiline's consular campaign of 63 BC: "So he pisses off a lot of conservatives, who physically and I guess in every other way possible kind of distance themselves from him. And again if you've been on "Life of Caesar" podcast on Facebook, I put a very famous painting up there of Catiline sitting by himself in the Senate. And all the senators literally are leaning away from him." 

This happened after the elections, when Cicero delivered his first speech against Catiline.

The painting is "Cicero Denounces Catiline" by Cesare Maccari.


• 43:46 – Ray: "Now, Silanus is physically sick. There is just something wrong with him. He's not gonna live very long."

This is McCullough. Silanus will die in a few years, but none of the sources mention his health.

• 48:27 – Ray: "Catiline is staying calm and he's not fleeing, he's not panicking, he stays in the Senate, he shows up every day. And because of his birth place, because of the blood flowing through his veins, because he's the right sort of senator, he can look Cicero, the senior consul, right in the eye and he says, 'I don't know what you're talking about. You're obviously losing your mind.' And his fellow patricians in the Senate more or less agree with Catiline, they don't believe Cicero, because Cicero's a 'new man' and Catiline was born with the right blood in his veins. [...]"
Cam: "[...] So Catiline leaves Rome that night."

The timeline is completely screwed up.

a) The meeting at which "they don't believe Cicero" took place before the elections. Cicero didn't have any proof.

b) After losing the elections, Catiline remained in Rome and stayed outwardly calm.

c) At the end of October, Crassus received anonymous letters, which he immediately took to Cicero. Cam and Ray skipped over this important episode.

The on-going debate in academic circles is whether or not Cicero forged those letters to force Crassus to publicly side against Catiline.

d) Armed with these letters and some additional info, Cicero got the Senate to pass their favorite decree, the senatus consultum ultimum.

e) Cicero delivered his first speech against Catiline at the start of November. It was at this meeting that the senators physically distanced themselves from Catiline. He tried to defend himself, reminding them of his patrician ancestors in comparison to Cicero's "new man" status, but he was shouted down. So his patrician blood did nothing for him here. And he left Rome that night.

• 51:16 – Ray on Catiline using Marius' standard: "And they think, 'Well, if he's leading us and we have this, there is no way we can lose.'"

Too romanticized. We don't know what his men thought. Most of his army deserted him when they heard that the Catilinarians were executed. But those who stayed fought very bravely.

***

Now on to the Catilinarian debate... Cam and Ray forgot to mention that Crassus did not show up for the debate. Kinda an important detail that speaks to the tension of the times. Crassus' absence also emphasizes Caesar's situation. His position was precarious. That he still had the guts to go against the majority in the Senate and almost succeeded in persuading them says a lot about his character.

• 51:56 – Ray on Caesar's "involvement" with Catiline: "But those are some of the rumors going around, spread, I think, spread by Cato, his enemy."

Cato was accusing Caesar during the debate. Before the debate, the two main guys who were spreading rumors were Catulus and Piso.

• 52:34 – Ray: "Everybody gets to speak . . . and they all go down the line, and they're all pretty much, 'kill them, kill them, kill them, kill them.' But then they get to Caesar and Caesar slows everything down. He calms everybody down and he goes, 'You know what? No more stories about all the horrible things that's gonna happen when Catiline comes back. I don't want to hear anymore about raping and killing and slaves. All these stuff that kinda happened when Gaius Marius lost it in the end. Let's calm down here, ok? Whatever you decide today is going to set a precedent, ok? So we can't just willy-nilly kill people, especially Roman citizens. Roman citizens are not to be harmed without a trial and here you are just talking about that you're gonna kill them.' So he's so persuasive that he gets a lot of the other guys who already spoken to change their mind. And this is pissing Cicero off to no end. And Cicero sees that he's losing this debate, so he stands up and he starts giving a speech again. And then he says what he has to say and I'm sure it was very moving, even though the words weren't kept. And he has a division. 'Everyone who agrees with me, step to my right. Everyone who disagrees with me, step to my left.' And Cicero's able to win that. He didn't win it by much, but he did win it. And the five men are going to be killed. . . . There is this one place, it's almost like a cave in the Forum. . . It's the Tullianum. And they have these five prisoners in there. Cicero goes in with the men and what they do is they take someone down there. I guess, they volunteered, I don't know. And they literally strangle the men to death. They don't stab them, they don't do anything else, they literally just put their hands around their throat and they strangle them until they're dead. So Cicero goes down with the five men and the executioner. A little while later Cicero comes back out and all he says is, 'They have lived.' Those five ringleaders are killed. Which was a very big step, Caesar was totally against it. But everybody knows that Caesar was against it and the people boo Caesar for the first time when he walks out the Senate. The people boo him because they're thinking, 'Oh God, it's another proscription-like when Sulla was around, we're all gonna be killed. Here's Caesar saying, no, don't kill the bad guys.' So that's the one time he messed up. He stuck to his convictions, but the people were not happy with him."

a) Ray's version of Caesar's speech is... less impressive than the one provided by Sallust. It's too long to quote here, so I'll just say that Caesar never said anything about Marius. He talked about Sulla's proscriptions, though, and that part was really good.

I also love this line when he talks about ancestors who outlawed summary executions: "Surely there was greater merit and wisdom in those men, who from slight resources created this mighty empire, than in us, who can barely hold what they gloriously won."

"He spoke with admirable restraint, a restraint the more admirable if he knew that Catulus and C. Piso had approached Cicero with the suggestion that he should fabricate false evidence to incriminate Caesar in the conspiracy. Caesar urged senators to put personal feelings out of mind, to remember that a wrong decision would greatly harm the reputation (dignitas) of the Senate, and that the summary execution of the prisoners, even if justified in the present case, might be made a precedent on another occasion when the circumstances were different. 'In the case of Cicero and the present situation, I feel no fear; but in a large state there are all sorts and kinds of people. On a different occasion, when someone else is consul, with an army behind him perhaps, true facts may be misrepresented, and the misrepresentation believed. Our decision today will be quoted as a precedent, the Senate will vote, the consul will draw his sword—and then who will be able to stop or to control him?'" – J.P.V.D. Balsdon

b) Ray completely skipped over Caesar's suggestion to imprison the men. But Cam talks about it later, so I'll leave it until then.

c) Ray also omits Cato. Cicero was not happy when other men (including his brother) started to support Caesar's proposal. But it was Cato who got the initiative back.

d) "and I'm sure it was very moving, even though the words weren't kept"

Actually, Cicero published it as "The Fourth Catilinarian Oration."

e) 'Everyone who agrees with me, step to my right. Everyone who disagrees with me, step to my left.'

The senators were requested to vote either for Caesar's proposal (imprisonment) or for Cato's (execution). And Cato's won.

f) The Catilinarians were strangled with a noose.

g) The people didn't boo Caesar. It was the exact opposite. Ray's confusion stems from Goldsworthy, who says that when Caesar was walking out, he got "mobbed by an angry crowd." It was Cicero's equestrian guards who jumped on him with swords:

"[Catulus and Piso] excited such violent odium against him, that certain Roman knights, who were stationed as an armed guard round the Temple of Concord, being prompted, either by the greatness of the danger, or by the impulse of a high spirit, to testify more openly their zeal for the republic, threatened Caesar with their swords as he went out of the senate-house." – Sallust

"...many of the young men who at that time formed a body-guard for Cicero ran together with drawn swords and threatened Caesar as he was leaving the senate. But Curio, as we are told, threw his toga round Caesar and got him away, while Cicero himself, when the young men looked to him for a sign, shook his head, either through fear of the people, or because he thought the murder would be wholly contrary to law and justice." – Plutarch

"...a body of the Roman knights, who stood under arms as a guard, threatened him with instant death, if he continued his determined opposition. They even thrust at him with their drawn swords, so that those who sat next him moved away; and a few friends, with no small difficulty, protected him, by throwing their arms round him, and covering him with their togas." – Suetonius

As for the people:

"[Cicero] showed a cowardly fear of the people, who were extravagantly attached to Caesar; in fact, a few days afterward, when Caesar came into the senate and tried to defend himself in the matters wherein suspicion had been fixed upon him, and met with a tumult of disapproval, the people, seeing that the session of the senate was lasting a longer time than usual, came up with loud cries and surrounded the senate-house, demanding Caesar, and ordering the senate to let him go." – Plutarch

If there was any booing, it was either Caesar's enemies booing him or the people booing Caesar's enemies.

"Caesar's attitude in the debate had roused the hostility of the Optimates and of their property-owning friends among the Equités. It was said that his life was in danger, indeed that Cicero saved him when a band of Equités was out for his blood, and that, had Cicero given the word, he would have been killed. With the populace at large, however, his popularity was enhanced; indeed, to distract this popular sympathy, on Cato's suggestion a free corn distribution was made to those resident in Rome, at a cost to the Treasury of three million sesterces." – J.P.V.D. Balsdon

• 56:11 – Cam: "This was Cicero and Cato and Silanus versus Caesar. As you say, Caesar really was against the execution. What he was for was, which was interesting... Gotta understand, folks, . . that in this era Rome didn't have prisons where you could put people for life. The idea of life imprisonment didn't exist. You were either sent into exile, if you were Roman of high standing, you know, a Roman citizen, or you were executed, if you were somebody of non-Roman citizenry. So, they didn't have– maybe like short-term prisons like this cave where they threw the key conspirators. They didn't have the capacity to put people in prison, just no one had thought about that before. So what Caesar was suggesting is we will send them to Italian towns, one to each. Pick five towns, we send one to each and that town will have the responsibility of keeping them captive for the rest of their life. . . . And he also said that death was too good for them. Death was too easy. We want them to suffer. We want to take away all their wealth, all their assets, make them live for the rest of their life in prison, destroy their family, destroy their families' pedigree, take away all their auctoritas. So that was his argument, which is kind of interesting in terms of historical precedent, I think, this idea of 'let's just take away their money and put them in prison, not execute them.' You know, if you think about that in modern terms. I know there are some parts of the US where they still execute people, but in the civilized world we don't do that anymore and we haven't done that for a long, long, long time. . . . But in Caesar's time this whole idea of putting people in prison was very new, which I found really, really interesting to think that maybe Caesar invented the idea of prison."

a) "This was Cicero and Cato and Silanus versus Caesar."

Not Silanus. He changed his tune when Caesar reminded them that executing Roman citizens without a trial was forbidden by law.

b) "And he also said that death was too good for them. Death was too easy. We want them to suffer." 

He said: "So far as the penalty is concerned, I can say with truth that amid grief and wretchedness death is a relief from woes, not a punishment; that it puts an end to all mortal ills and leaves no room either for sorrow or for joy."

c) "We want to take away all their wealth, all their assets, make them live for the rest of their life in prison, destroy their family, destroy their families' pedigree, take away all their auctoritas."

He never said this. This kind of viciousness towards his fellow citizens is not Caesar's style.

He did propose to confiscate their property, but he is not suggesting barring their children from public life or taking away their rights. Confiscation of property is a heavy blow, but it's possible to recover from it. Sulla confiscated Caesar's family inheritances and his wife's dowry, and Caesar still has a career. Or take the Lucullus brothers, for example. Their father was exiled, but they still have successful careers.

d) No, Caesar didn't invent a prison system. He suggested that the conspirators should be held in custody in Italian towns. Romans were already doing that with captured foreigners of high standing. For example, Numidian king Syphax was kept in Tibur; Perseus of Macedon and Bituitus; a king of Arverni, were in Alba Fucens; Thracian prince Beithys was in Carsioli, etc. The suggestion was new only in the context of Roman citizens.

e) There are contradictions in our sources. According to Cicero and Sallust, Caesar suggested keeping them imprisoned for life. But according to Plutarch and Appian, he suggested keeping them imprisoned until the final victory over Catiline and then return to discuss their cases. Most historians take Cicero and Sallust's version, but some historians believe that Cicero intentionally twisted Caesar's words. Just FYI.

• 01:00:19 – Cam: "During this whole period Cicero was sort of, you know, trying to turn the crowd in the Forum against Catiline and his conspirators. He described many of the conspirators as 'the men you see with their carefully combed hair, dripping with oil, some smooth as girls, others with shaggy beards, with tunics down to their ankles and wrists, and wearing frocks not togas.' Like, this really disparaging portrayal of the fashion sense... We've already talked in earlier episodes that Caesar was known for being fairly flamboyant with his dress and his hair style. And so there is a suggestion that even though he didn't mention Caesar by name, he's kind of calling out Caesar and guys like that, who are these yuppie. Yuppie pretty boys. An again let's remember that, you know, Cicero was stoic in his... No, that was Cato, who was a stoic. Was Cicero a stoic?"

a) Accusations of effeminate dressing style were common.

"Here, as in so many other aspects, Roman society was coming under the influence of Greece. The traditional senatorial tunic was sleeveless or had short sleeves. . . However, increasingly the Greek fashion for long sleeves (tunica chirodota), derided by traditionalists as only usual in women's dress, was being adopted. Indeed, it had already become a part of political invective in the second century BC, when Scipio Aemilianus, as censor in 142 BC, attacked P. Sulpicius Galus for his long sleeves and effeminacy. It became a staple for Cicero, whose political enemies are constantly represented in this way. . . . Caesar clearly was something of a man of fashion, but he was not unusual in this, and the charges leveled against him in this regard were used against many of his contemporaries." – Jeremy Paterson

b) Cicero was eclectic. He liked bits and pieces of different schools of philosophy, but he didn't like Epicureanism.

• 01:02:47 – Cam: "They're standing in the Forum, they're going at it, you know, Cicero versus Caesar. Cicero obviously is accusing Caesar of being in cahoots with the conspirators, with Catiline. When all of the sudden somebody comes in, slave comes in, quietly slips Caesar a note. Caesar reads it, closes it up again, Cato goes, 'Aha! Check it out! He's getting secret notes from Catiline or the conspirators. He's in cahoots with them, they're talking to each other. I demand you read the note aloud, Mr. Caesar.' Caesar walks up, doesn't say a word, adjusts his toga, winks at the camera, walks over, doesn't read aloud but hands the note to Cato. Cato opens the note and it's a love letter from Servilia. Servilia! Cato's half-sister, married to Silanus, who is the consul-in-waiting. And Cato allegedly throws it back at Caesar and says, 'Have it back, you drunk!' Which was funny because Caesar didn't drink and Cato was a well-known alcoholic. . . . There are two things about this. Firstly, we've talked a number of times about his long-standing affair with Servilia, married woman, goes back possibly to their early teens. There is this suggestion, just to remind listeners that Servilia was the mother of Brutus and Brutus may have been Caesar's illegitimate son. . . Which would've traced their relationship back to when they were 12 or 13, which is possible. This is 20-odd years later and they're still sending passionate love notes to each other in the middle of the day. Well, she sent one to him anyway. Not only just sending him the note, but sending him a note to be delivered to him in the Forum."

a) They weren't standing in the open space of the Forum. They were in the Temple of Concord.

b) Cicero was against Caesar's proposal, but in this particular instance, it was Caesar vs. Cato.

c) The original story goes like this:

"...the story goes that on this occasion, when Caesar was eagerly engaged in a great struggle with Cato and the attention of the senate was fixed upon the two men, a little note was brought in from outside to Caesar. Cato tried to fix suspicion upon the matter and alleged that it had something to do with the conspiracy, and bade him read the writing aloud. Then Caesar handed the note to Cato, who stood near him. But when Cato had read the note, which was an unchaste letter from his sister Servilia to Caesar, with whom she was passionately and guiltily in love, he threw it to Caesar, saying, "Take it, thou sot," and then resumed his speech." – Plutarch

d) Caesar would have to be 14. Servilia was probably 16 and was already married to Marcus Junius Brutus.

Again, this love note thing is the very first record of their relationship. Whatever the rumors of Brutus' paternity were, they probably originated during Caesar's dictatorship, when the conspirators were shaming Brutus into joining. They were constantly reminding him of his ancestor Brutus, who killed the last king of Rome, and they were like, "Are you really Brutus? Maybe you're not Brutus at all?" They even left "You're not Brutus" inscriptions on the walls. And nobody really cared that Caesar was not much older than him.

• 01:06:24 – Ray: "And she [Servilia] knew what she was doing. It wasn't bad timing. From what I can read, she was doing it on purpose."

Colleen McCullough again. The above quote from Plutarch is the only source for this story.

• 01:06:32 – Ray: "From what I've been able to read, Cato had a really annoying [can't make out the word] loud voice. It was really high-pitched."

This is McCullough. We don't know what voice Cato had. And it was actually Caesar who had a high-pitched voice, at least when he was giving speeches.

"He is said to have delivered himself in a high-pitched voice with impassioned action and gestures, which were not without grace." – Suetonius

Episode 8