NB Part (ii) of A Level prescription begins here

§51(b) textvideo adhuc constare, iudices, omnia, Miloni etiam utile fuisse Clodium vivere, illi ad ea, quae concupierat, optatissimum interitum Milonis; odium fuisse illius in hunc acerbissimum, nullum huius in illum; consuetudinem illius perpetuam in vi inferenda, huius tantum in repellenda;

--------------------------------------------------------

§51(b) translationI find that, up to this point, gentlemen of the jury, everything is consistent: that for Milo it was even advantageous that Clodius should live; but for Clodius, the death of Milo was most desirable in view of what he had ambition for; that Clodius’ hatred against Milo was so deep but that there was none in Milo against Clodius; that there was the abiding practice of Clodius in initiating violence but of Milo only in repelling it.

§ 51(b) notes

illi ad eaadversative asyndeton and compression of ‘ad ea’ omitting some such thought as ‘with a view to achieving’. Helps emph the contrast between M and Cl as does the balanced phrasing using ‘hic’ and ‘ille’ in the rest of this indirect statement. Note also the simplicity of the phrasing applied to Milo and the more elaborate clauses referring to Clodius.

§52 textmortem ab illo denuntiatam Miloni et praedictam palam, nihil umquam auditum ex Milone; profectionis huius diem illi notum, reditus illius huic ignotum fuisse; huius iter necessarium, illius etiam potius alienum; hunc prae se tulisse illo die Roma exiturum, illum eo die se dissimulasse rediturum; hunc nullius rei mutasse consilium, illum causam mutandi consilii finxisse; huic, si insidiaretur, noctem prope urbem exspectandam, illi, etiamsi hunc non timeret, tamen accessum ad urbem nocturnum fuisse metuendum.

--------------------------------------------------------

§52 translationMilo’s death had been threatened and openly predicted by Clodius, yet nothing like that had been heard from Milo. Milo’s date of departure was known to him but the date of Clodius’ return was unknown to Milo. Milo’s journey was necessary, Clodius’, on the other hand, even inconvenient. Milo had openly said that he would be leaving Rome on the day in question, but Clodius had concealed that he would be returning that day. Milo changed his plans in no respect; Clodius invented an excuse for changing his plans. Milo, if he were setting an ambush, should have waited for nightfall close to the city; Clodius, even if he was not afraid of Milo, should have feared approaching the city at night.

§ 52 notes

This is a summary of the arguments used in §§32-51 and is an indirect statement still dependent upon ‘video’ in the previous §. Each argument on its own is comparatively weak but they are stronger when combined, if we admit the assumption of the speech that the meeting at Bovillae was premeditated by Clodius.

Note the continuing of the adversative asyndeta in this section to draw the contrast between the actions of the two men.

nihil umquam auditum ex MiloneBut Cicero himself, in a letter to Atticus (in 57BC Att.4.3.5), reported that Milo had openly threatened to kill Clodius.

§53 textvideamus nunc id, quod caput est, locus ad insidias ille ipse, ubi congressi sunt,utri tandem fuerit aptior. id vero, iudices, etiam dubitandum et diutius cogitandum est. ante fundum Clodi, quo in fundo propter insanas illas substructiones facile hominum mille versabantur valentium, edito adversarii atque excelso loco superiorem se fore putarat Milo et ob eam rem eum locum ad pugnam potissimum elegerat an in eo loco est potius exspectatus ab eo, qui ipsius loci spe facere impetum cogitarat? res loquitur ipsa, iudices, quae semper valet plurimum.

--------------------------------------------------------

§53 translationLet us now look at what is the key point – to which of them the actual place itself where they met was in fact more suitable as a place of ambush. But that, gentlemen of the jury, must even be in doubt and considered further. It was in front of Clodius’farm, the farm on which at least a thousand strong men were occupied because of that crazy underpinning project: had Milo imagined that he would have the upper hand with his opponent in a position that was above him on higher ground and had he chosen that place because of this as the most advantageous for a fight? Or rather, was he being waited for in that place by one who had planned to make an attack with confidence in his actual position? The facts, gentlemen of the jury, which always carry the most weight, speak for themselves.

§ 53 notes

locus ad insidias ille ipse, ubi congressi sunt, utri tandem fuerit aptiorunusual word order to place emphasis on ‘locus’ (which should go with ‘aptior’ and is emphasised by ‘ille ipse’).

propter insanas illas substructiones facile hominum mille versabantur valentiumit appears that Cl was enlarging his mansion by creating some sort of basement floor and supporting it on pillars or arches; this grandiose project is referred to again at 85 as having involved the obliteration of some ancient altars. Cicero may be implying that Milo wouldn’t have dreamt of attacking him here with those sorts of reinforcements at hand for Cl and that Cl’s workmen would have been available to him for attacking Milo with. Alternatively, some suggest that the sentence means that 1000 strong men could be accommodated in the structure, but this seems less plausible.

Putarat = putaverat

§54 text

si haec non gesta audiretis, sed picta videretis, tamen appareret, uter esset insidiator, uter nihil cogitaret mali, cum alter veheretur in raeda paenulatus, una sederet uxor. quid horum non inpeditissimum, vestitus an vehiculum an comes? quid minus promptum ad pugnam, cum paenula inretitus, raeda inpeditus, uxore paene constrictus esset? videte nunc illum primum egredientem e villa subito (cur?), vesperi (quid necesse est?), tarde (qui convenit, praesertim id temporis?). “devertit in villam Pompei.” Pompeium ut videret? sciebat in Alsiensi esse. villam ut perspiceret? miliens in ea fuerat. quid ergo erat? morae et tergiversationes; dum hic veniret, locum relinquere noluit.

--------------------------------------------------------

§54 translationIf you were not listening to these statements of fact but were seeing them presented in pictorial form, it would still be apparent which of the two was the bandit and which of the two was plotting nothing of evil intent, since one of them, in his travelling cloak, was riding in a coach, his wife sitting beside him. Which of these of these was not a serious inconvenience – the clothing or the means of transport or the companion? What is less ready for a fight than a man entangled with his cloak, encumbered with a coach and virtually shackled with his wife there? Now see the other man first coming forth from his house suddenly (why?), and at dusk (why is that necessary?), and taking his time (what is the sense of that, especially at that hour?) “He was paying a visit to Pompeius’ house.” To see Pompeius? But he knew that he was at his place at Alsium. To look at the house, then? He had been in it a thousand times. Why was it, then? Delaying and loitering – until Milo got there, he didn’t want to leave the area.

§ 54 notes

paenulatusfor this and other details of Milo and Clodius’ attire, etc see §28

videte nunc illumCicero now switches to the other man (Clodius), which is what we were expecting at ‘alter’ earlier in this section; the lack of a concluding second alter earlier is called anacoluthon (where the syntactical structure of the second part of a sentence does not follow the first). Cicero now uses the present tense for a more visual and immediate sense (‘picta’ – a picture – rather than ‘gesta’ – narrative) and also asks the jury’s questions for them!

devertit in villam Pompei.” Pompeium ut videret? sciebat in Alsiensi essePompeius had a villa/praedio at Asium on the coast of Etruria, modern Palo. Pompeius had been reconciled with Clodius in 56BC (see translation §21).[On Pompey (Pompeius) see Colson introduction]

§55 text

age nunc iter expediti latronis cum Milonis inpedimentis comparate. semper ille antea cum uxore, tum sine ea; numquam nisi in raeda, tum in equo; comites Graeculi quocumque ibat, etiam cum in castra Etrusca properabat, tum nugarum in comitatu nihil. Milo, qui numquam, tum casu pueros symphoniacos uxoris ducebat et ancillarum greges. ille, qui semper secum scorta, semper exoletos, semper lupas duceret, tum neminem, nisi ut virum a viro lectum esse diceres. cur igitur victus est? quia non semper viator a latrone, non numquam etiam latro a viatore occiditur: quia, quamquam paratus in imparatos [Clodius], tamen mulier inciderat in viros.

--------------------------------------------------------

§55 translationCome now and compare the unencumbered brigand’s way of travelling with the inconveniences Milo had. Previously, Clodius always used to travel with his wife – but this time without her; he never did so except in a coach – but this time on a horse; his little Greek companions, with him wherever he went, even when hurrying off to his Etruscan stronghold – this time there was no such silliness in his retinue. Milo, who normally never did, by chance happened to be taking along with him on this occasion his wife’s choruses of boys and bevies of slave-girls. Clodius, who would always, without fail, take prostitutes and rent-boys and tarts with him, on this occasion had no one except those you might say had been chosen each by another man. Why therefore was he defeated? Because the traveller is not always killed by the highwayman – sometimes the highwayman is killed by the traveller. And because although prepared against the unprepared, Clodius had fallen as a woman against men.

§ 55 notes

See §§28-29 on details referred to again here.

tamen mulier inciderat in virosa witty reference to the Bona Dea incident (see note on §46) when Clodius had been by contrast a man who had fallen among women. It could also imply effeminacy/degeneracy as a dig at Clodius.

§56 textnec vero sic erat umquam non paratus Milo contra illum, ut non satis fere esset paratus. semper [ille], et quantum interesset P. Clodi se perire, et quanto illi odio esset, et quantum ille auderet, cogitabat. quam ob rem vitam suam, quam maximis praemiis propositam et paene addictam sciebat, numquam in periculum sine praesidio et sine custodia proiciebat. adde casus, adde incertos exitus pugnarum Martemque communem, qui saepe spoliantem iam et exsultantem evertit et perculit ab abiecto, adde inscitiam pransi, poti, oscitantis ducis, qui cum a tergo hostem interclusum reliquisset, nihil de eius extremis comitibus cogitavit, in quos incensos ira vitamque domini desperantis cum incidisset, haesit in iis poenis, quas ab eo servi fideles pro domini vita expetiverunt.

--------------------------------------------------------

§56 translationMilo, in fact, was never so unprepared against Clodius that he did not at least prepare himself to some extent. He always bore in mind how much it was in Publius Clodius’ interest that he should be dead, how much Clodius hated him, and how much Clodius would dare to do. Because of this, he

knew that his life could hardly be called his own, so enormous was the price that had been put on it, and so he never exposed himself to danger without protection and without a guard. Remember the chance circumstances, remember the uncertain outcomes of fights and that Mars is on both sides – he who has often overpowered the exultant victor even as he is in the process of taking the spoils and has struck him by a blow from his fallen victim. Remember the stupidity of the yawning leader after he had wined and dined: when he had left his enemy cut off in the rear he thought nothing about Milo’s companions at the end of the line. When Clodius fell upon them, ablaze as they were with anger and despairing for their master’s life, he met with that punishment which the loyal slaves exacted from him in return for the life of their master.

§56 notes

Cicero presents Milo as taking reasonable precautions and reinforces his argument (from §29) that the fatal blow in this accidental death was struck not by Milo personally but by his loyal slaves. This is to conceal the accusation (which Asconius makes clear was the case – see Asc32) that Milo ordered Clodius to be dragged out of the inn, already wounded, and finished off. See also §29 and how Milo explains the manumission of those slaves in §§57ff (therefore they cannot be tortured to give evidence).

NB §§57-71 omitted

§72 text

nec vero me, iudices, Clodianum crimen movet, nec tam sum demens tamque vestri sensus ignarus atque expers, ut nesciam, quid de morte Clodi sentiatis. de qua si iam nollem ita diluere crimen, ut dilui, tamen impune Miloni palam clamare ac mentiri gloriose liceret: “Occidi, occidi, non Sp. Maelium, qui annona levanda iacturisque rei familiaris, quia nimis amplecti plebem videbatur, in suspicionem incidit regni appetendi; non Ti. Gracchum, qui collegae magistratum per seditionem abrogavit, quorum interfectores inpleverunt orbem terrarum nominis sui gloria; sed eum” (auderet enim dicere, cum patriam periculo suo liberasset), “cuius nefandum adulterium in pulvinaribus sanctissimis nobilissimae feminae comprehenderunt;

--------------------------------------------------------

§72 translationTruly the charge of murdering Clodius does not trouble me, gentlemen of the jury. I am not so crazy or so unaware and so imperceptive of your opinion that I do not know what you feel about the death of Clodius. If I were not willing to refute the charge – as I have done – about his death, Milo would still justifiably be able to cry openly and tell the lie to his credit: “I killed him; but I killed no Spurius Maelius – he who, by lowering the price of corn and squandering his family fortune, fell under the suspicion of seeking after power because he seemed to embrace the plebs too warmly; nor was it a Tiberius Gracchus, who deposed his colleague from office unconstitutionally. The killers of these men filled the whole world with the glory of their names. But the man I killed,” (for Milo would dare to say this because he had freed his country at his

own personal risk) “was one whose unspeakable adultery on the most sacred of couches was discovered by women of most noble birth.

§72 notes

NB The omitted §§57-71 should be read in translation (see also Colson’s analysis p125-126) – where Cicero deals with the manumitted slaves and the military presence at the trial.

The part of the speech which was added when the speech was revised for publication begins at this point. This, then, is the defence which Cicero might have made but chose not to, that Clodius’ murder was justified by the public interest (see Asc 41); there is criticism of Pompey from §§67ff. Cicero shows how Milo could have been defended had he chosen to plead that the guilt of the crime was outweighed by the advantages which the nation derived from the death of Clodius. He says that he does not fear the charge of murdering Clodius (crimen Clodianum) but he does fear the ill-diguised hostility of Pompey.

de qua...The Latin sentence which begins here ends at the end of §75 and is the longest sentence in Cicero; a translator has no option but to chop it up.

Sp. Maelium & Ti. GracchumThese names have already been referred to by Cicero in §8 (and see also §83) as men lawfully killed by others in the past. Spurius Maelius was a wealthy plebeian who used his own means to relieve a corn shortage in 439BC and was suspected of aiming at tyranny; he was killed by Gaius Servilius Ahala. Tiberius Gracchus secured the deposition of his fellow tribune Marcus Octavius when Octavius refused to withdraw his veto of Gracchus’ agrarian bill in 133BC; this and his unprecedented attempts to secure re-election led to his murder, along with his supporters. He was killed by the pontifex maximus, Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica Serapio (the Nasica of §83).

sed eumthe repeated ‘eum’ in the next sections is the same man – Clodius.

cuius nefandum adulterium ... comprehenderuntRef also to §§46&55 – Bona Dea incident.Note also the use of two superlatives here to express disgust/exasperation.

§73 texteum cuius supplicio senatus sollemnes religiones expiandas saepe censuit, eum, quem cum sorore germana nefarium stuprum fecisse L. Lucullus iuratus se quaestionibus habitis dixit comperisse; eum, qui civem quem senatus, quem populus Romanus, quem omnes gentes urbis ac vitae civium conservatorem iudicarant, servorum armis exterminavit; eum qui regna dedit, ademit, orbem terrarum, quibuscum voluit, partitus est; eum, qui plurimis caedibus in foro factis singulari virtute et gloria civem domum vi et armis compulit; eum, cui nihil umquam nefas fuit nec in facinore nec in libidine; eum, qui aedem Nympharum incendit, ut memoriam publicam recensionis tabulis publicis impressam exstingueret;

--------------------------------------------------------

§73 translation

He was the man whose punishment the senate frequently declared to be necessary for the purification of the sacred rites. He was the man whom Lucius Lucullus stated on oath that he had discovered, after conducting an investigation, had committed the unspeakable crime of incest with his own sister. He was the man who banished with the weapons of slaves a citizen whom the senate, whom the Roman people, whom all the nations had delared the saviour of the city and of the life of its citizens. He was the man who gave out kingdoms and took them away and parcelled out the world to whomsoever he desired. He was the man who, after committing a great many murders in the forum, confined by armed force a citizen of outstanding virtue and renown to his house. He was the man to whom nothing was ever wicked, either in the sphere of crime or sexual licence. He was the man who set fire to the temple of the Nymphs in order to destroy the public records inscribed in the national archives of the censors.

§73 notes

cum sorore germana nefarium stuprum fecisseCicero here refers to the alleged adultery of Clodius with his own sister, Clodia. This was the rather unpleasant but funny aside made in another famous speech of Cicero in which he defended Caelius Rufus when accused of attempting to poison Clodia. Lucius Licinius Lucullus divorced Clodia (his wife and the youngest of Clodius’ three sisters, all called Clodia) for adultery in 66BC.‘germana’ is used to distinguish a blood relation from one adopted into the family (Clodia was his own, natural sister).

civem quem = Cicero, exiled by Clodius in 58BC. It was by suppressing the Catilinarian conspiracy in 63 that Cicero was considered to have saved the City from fire and its citizens from slaughter. Notice the repeated ‘quem’ and its rhetorical effect (perhaps pointing to himself at each use of the word here)/

dedit, ademitasyndeton – the omission of a conjunction gives force to his assertion and its expression. Clodius had done this without the consent of the senate

civem domum vi et armis compulitThe description of Pompey can be taken as ironical inasmuch as Pompey showed no such courage or virtue in failing to stand up to Clodius. Later sections deal less subtley with Pompey (eg 79)

aedem Nympharum incenditIn his speech Pro Caelio, Cicero did not say this (merely implying the arson had been at Clodius’ order but committed by Sextus Cloelius). This destruction of public records may be presumed to imply a cover-up of electoral or other fraudulent actions committed by Clodius.

§74 text

eum denique, cui iam nulla lex erat, nullum civile ius, nulli possessionum termini; qui non calumnia litium, non iniustis vindiciis ac sacramentis alienos fundos, sed castris, exercitu, signis inferendis petebat, qui non solum Etruscos (eos enim penitus contempserat), sed hunc P. Varium, fortissimum atque optimum civem, iudicem nostrum, pellere possessionibus armis castrisque conatus est, qui cum architectis et decempedis villas multorum hortosque peragrabat, qui Ianiculo et Alpibus spem possessionum terminarat suarum, qui cum ab equite Romano splendido et forti, M. Paconio, non impetrasset, ut sibi insulam in lacu Prilio venderet, repente lintribus in eam insulam materiem, calcem, caementa, arma convexit dominoque trans ripam inspectante non dubitavit exstruere aedificium in alieno;

--------------------------------------------------------

§74 translationHe was the man, finally, for whom there was now no statute, no civil jurisdiction, no property boundaries. It was he who went after other people’s estates not by legal trickery or unjustified claims and deposits but by a military camp, an army and deploying standards. It was he who by his weapons and camps attempted to drive from their properties not only the Etruscans (for he had come to despise them utterly), but even Publius Varius here, a most courageous and excellent citizen and one of our judges. It was he who used to roam around many people’s houses and gardens with architects and measuring rods. It was he who set the Janiculum and the Alps as the borders of the territory he hoped to possess. It was he who, when he had failed to induce the fine and brave Roman equestrian Marcus Paconius to sell him an island on Lake Prilius, he suddenly conveyed by boats onto that island timber, lime, stone and tools; and as the owner looked on from the other shore, he did not hesitate to construct a building on someone else’s land.

§74 notes

non iniustis vindiciis ac sacramentisSee Colson – i.e. Clodius did not make legal claims on property to which he was not even entitled (by laying down a deposit to be forfeited if he lost the case); he did not bother to go to court to obtain property he wanted: he simply took it by force.

Etruscoscf §§26,50,51

P. Varium & M. Paconioidentity uncertain and not otherwise known; ‘hunc...iudicem nostrum’ indicates Varius was a member of the jury present in court.

lacu PrilioLake Prilius was on the coast of Etruria, near Rusellae.

§75 textqui huic T. Furfanio, cui viro, di immortales! (quid enim ego de muliercula Scantia, quid de adulescente P. Apinio dicam? quorum utrique mortem est minitatus, nisi sibi hortorum possessione cessissent) – sed ausum esse T. Furfanio dicere, si sibi pecuniam, quantam poposcerat, non dedisset, mortuum se in domum eius inlaturum, qua invidia huic esset tali viro conflagrandum; qui Appium fratrem, hominem mihi coniunctum fidissima

gratia, absentem de possessione fundi deiecit, qui parietem sic per vestibulum sororis instituit ducere, sic agere fundamenta, ut sororem non modo vestibulo privaret, sed omni aditu et limine.”

--------------------------------------------------------

§75 translationIt was he who told Titus Furfanius here (what a man, by the immortal gods!) – for why should I make mention of that poor woman Scantia or of the young Publius Apinius, both of whom he threatened with death if they did not give over the possession of their lands to him – but he dared to tell Titus Furfanius that if he did not give him the money – as much as he had asked – he would plant a corpse in his house, and that by this scandal such a man would surely be destroyed. It was he who deprived his absent brother Appius, a man allied to myself in most loyal friendship, of the possession of his estate. It was he who set out to build a wall and lay its foundations across his sister’s forecourt in such a way that he not only deprived his sister of her forecourt, but even any access or entrance to it.“

§75 notes

huic T. FurfanioTitus Furfanius Postumus, a friend of Cicero’s and governor of Sicily in 45BC, also a member of the jury (huic).

quid enim egoCicero (ego) intrudes into Milo’s imaginary invective that began at §72.

mulierculanote diminutive form – poor woman

poposceratindicative and so Milo’s/Cicero’s own comment rather than Clodius’.

Appium fratremClodius’ elder bro. Appius Claudius Pulcher. As praetor in 57, he took Clodius’ side against Cicero. He then became consul in 54 and governor of Cilicia 53-51 (succeeded by Cicero who was appalled at what he found indicating the greed of Appius) and censor in 50. Cicero forced himself to remain on good terms with him (mihi fidissima gratia – forgetting it is Milo who is speaking, not himself).

qui parietem ... omni aditu et limineThis reference to building work has not satisfactorily been explained. Clodius lived on the Palatine and had ambitions to unite the neighbouring properties (including Cicero’s) with his own. This involved the rebuilding of the portico of one of the houses to extend it across the others. He may have decided to extend this further to incorporate the house of his middle sister, Clodia Metelli. Cicero uses the information in the Pro Caelio as well to help blacken Clodius’ character.Cookson says of this ending of the long sentence that began in §72 that it culminates, to our ears, in an almost ridiculous anti-climax’. Cicero has, through Milo, listed Clodius’ offences against religion, the state, private individuals, even against hisown family; he is thus devoid of both political virtue and natural human qualities, all being subsumed to his greed and desire for control. Besides this, Cicero’s condemnation of

Clodius’ beautiful but immoral sister in the Pro Caelio would be well known to his audience. Cookson goes on to say: ‘It is probable therefore that she was quite equal to looking after her own front door, and it is difficutl to understand how Cicero could have had the face to lead up to this point or what effect he supposed that it would have upon the jury’.

§76 textquamquam haec quidem iam tolerabilia videbantur, etsi aequabiliter in rem publicam, in privatos, in longinquos, in propinquos, in alienos, in suos irruebat; sed nescio quo modo iam usu obduruerat et percalluerat civitatis incredibilis patientia. quae vero aderant iam et impendebant, quonam modo ea aut depellere potuissetis aut ferre? imperium ille si nactus esset – omitto socios, exteras nationes, reges, tetrarchas; vota enim faceretis, ut in eos se potius inmitteret quam in vestras possessiones, vestra tecta, vestras pecunias – pecunias dico; a liberis medius fidius et a coniugibus vestris numquam ille effrenatas suas libidines cohibuisset. fingi haec putatis, quae patent, quae nota sunt omnibus, quae tenentur, servorum exercitus illum in urbe conscripturum fuisse, per quos totam rem publicam resque privatas omnium possideret?

--------------------------------------------------------

§76 translationThese actions were in fact now being viewed as tolerable – even though he was making assaults without distinction upon the State and private individuals, upon those far away and those close to him, upon strangers and friends. But I do not know how the incredible patience of the people had become hardened and desensitised by over-use. Yet as for what was then upon us and looming over us, how could you have either averted or put up with those things? Suppose Clodius had obtained military authority – I say nothing of our allies, foreign nations, kings and tetrarchs; you would have been offering prayers for him to launch himself at them rather than at your possessions, your property and your wealth. I say ‘wealth’ – but as heaven is my witness, he would never have controlled his unrestrained lust from your wives and children! Do you think I am making this up? – it is plain to see, it is known to everyone, it is established fact that he was about to enlist armies of slaves in the city through whom he intended to gain possession of the whole State and everyone’s personal property.

§76 notes

Further denigration of Clodius and what Milo has prevented, i.e. the service he has done.

exercitus & omniumNotice the exaggeration in using the plural ‘armies’ of slaves and ‘everyone’s’ private property (even you, no one would have escaped) – to help jury to see what Milo has saved them and the State from.

§77 textquam ob rem, si cruentum gladium tenens clamaret T. Annius: “adeste, quaeso, atque audite, cives! P. Clodium interfeci; eius furores, quos nullis iam legibus, nullis iudiciis frenare poteramus, hoc ferro et hac dextera a cervicibus vestris reppuli, per me ut unum ius, aequitas,

leges, libertas, pudor, pudicitia in civitate maneret”: esset vero timendum, quonam modo id ferret civitas. nunc enim quis est, qui non probet, qui non laudet, qui non unum post hominum memoriam T. Annium plurimum rei publicae profuisse, maxima laetitia populum Romanum, cunctam Italiam, nationes omnes affecisse et dicat et sentiat? non queo, vetera illa populi Romani gaudia quanta fuerint, iudicare; multas tamen iam summorum imperatorum clarissimas victorias aetas nostra vidit, quarum nulla neque tam diuturnam attulit laetitiam nec tantam.

--------------------------------------------------------

§77 translationIn view of this, if Titus Annius were to declare, holding up his bloody sword, “Come here, if you will, and listen, citizens! I have killed Publius Clodius. His madness, which we could no longer restrain, either by laws, or by the courts, with this blade and this right hand have I held it back from your necks – so that, through me, singlehandedly, justice and equity, law and liberty, modesty and chastity might remain in our State”: he would indeed have to worry how the State might take it. For, as things are, who is there who would not approve, who would not praise his act, who would not declare and feel that this one man, Titus Annius, has benefited the State more than anyone in history and has brought the greatest joy to the Roman people, the whole of Italy and all the nations of the world? I am not able to judge how great the rejoicing of the Roman people was at certain times in the past, but in our own age it has already seen the many distinguished victories of our finest generals – but none of these victories has brought joy so lasting or so great.

§77 notes

T. AnniusMilo – whose full name was Titus Annius Milo

furoresplural for emphasis – the whole § is full of hyperbole.

me ut unum ius leges, libertas, pudor, pudicitiaassonance alliteration

esset vero timendum, quonam modo id ferret civitasironical

summorum imperatorum clarissimas victoriasa thinly veiled sleight against Pompey whose victory over Mithridates was one of these

§78 textmandate hoc memoriae, iudices. spero multa vos liberosque vestros in re publica bona esse visuros; in iis singulis ita semper existimabitis, vivo P. Clodio nihil eorum vos visuros fuisse. in spem maximam et, quem ad modum confido, verissimam sumus adducti hunc ipsum annum hoc ipso summo viro consule compressa hominum licentia, cupiditatibus fractis, legibus et iudiciis constitutis salutarem civitati fore. num quis est igitur tam demens, qui hoc P. Clodio vivo contingere potuisse arbitretur? quid? ea, quae tenetis privata atque vestra, dominante homine furioso quod ius perpetuae possessionis habere potuissent?.

--------------------------------------------------------

§78 translationKeep this in mind, gentlemen of the jury: I hope that you and your children will enjoy many blessings in public life; in every one of them you will always have the thought that, with Clodius alive, you would have enjoyed none of them. We have been brought to the highest and, as I trust, well-founded hope that this very year will be, under this very man, our fine consul, a healthy one for the State, after the unrestrained freedom of people has been checked, unruly passions crushed and the laws and courts established. There is surely, therefore, no one so insane as to argue that this could be achieved with Clodius alive? Furthermore, those things that you hold as your own private property – what right of lasting ownership could they have had under the rule of that lunatic?

§78 notes

hoc ipso summo viro consulePompey – ironic?

Note that the prescription breaks off at ‘potuissent’, half way through this section.

NB §§78b-83a omitted

§83b textsed huius beneficii gratiam, iudices, fortuna populi Romani et vestra felicitas et di immortales sibi deberi putant. nec vero quisquam aliter arbitrari potest, nisi qui nullam vim esse ducit numenve divinum, quem neque imperii nostri magnitudo neque sol ille nec caeli signorumque motus nec vicissitudines rerum atque ordines movent neque, id quod maximum est, maiorum sapientia, qui sacra, qui caerimonias, qui auspicia et ipsi sanctissime coluerunt et nobis suis posteris prodiderunt.

--------------------------------------------------------

§83 translationBut the fortune of the Roman people, your good luck and the immortal gods all think that gratitude for this blessing is owed to them, gentlemen of the jury. Indeed, no one can believe otherwise – unless there is anyone who does not have a belief that there is any divine power or will, or who is unmoved by the size of our empire or the sun up there and the movements of the heavens and the constellations or the ordered changes of nature or, what is most important of all, by the wisdom of our ancestors who did themselves observe most reverently the sacred rites, the ceremonies and the auspices and handed them down to us, their descendants.

§83 notes

NB §§78b-83a omitted – read in translation/Colson’s analysis.

fortuna populi Romani et vestra felicitas

personification – putant can strictly only be taken with di immortales.

Cicero is speaking here as a philosopher and the generally held belief that by study of natural phenomena, such as the changes of the seasons, man comes to appreciate the existence of divine providence and design governing the Earth. The rule of Rome is seen as part of this natural order.

§84 textest, est profecto illa vis, neque in his corporibus atque in hac inbecillitate nostra inest quiddam, quod vigeat et sentiat, non inest in hoc tanto naturae tam praeclaromotu . nisi forte idcirco non putant, quia non apparet nec cernitur; proinde quasi nostram ipsam mentem, qua sapimus, qua providemus, qua haec ipsa agimus ac dicimus, videre aut plane, qualis aut ubi sit, sentire possimus. ea vis igitur ipsa, quae saepe incredibiles huic urbi felicitates atque opes attulit, illam perniciem extinxit ac sustulit, cui primum mentem iniecit, ut vi irritare ferroque lacessere fortissimum virum auderet vincereturque ab eo, quem si vicisset, habiturus esset impunitatem et licentiam sempiternam.

--------------------------------------------------------

§84 translationYes, indeed, that power does exist. Nor can it be that there exists in these physical bodies and in this feebleness of ours that certain something which gives life and consciousness, but that it does not exist in those vast and so noble workings of nature. Unless, perhaps, they do not believe in it because of the fact that it is not seen or discernable – as if we could likewise see or clearly sense the nature or place of our own mind itself, by which we think, by which we perceive, by which we act and speak at this very moment. That power itself, therefore, which has often brought this city unbelievable blessings and wealth, has purged and relieved it of that menace. It first inspired in him the idea to dare provoke with violence and harass with the sword the bravest of men so that he would be conquered by a man over whom, if he had beaten him, he was going to enjoy impunity and freedom for ever.

§ 84 notes

est, eststrong repetition of such a simple word, made more so by ‘profecto’. Similar rhetorical emphasis in seemingly unnecessary words such as ‘in his...in hac...tanto...tam’ etc

illam perniciemClodius cf belua §32

In the last lines (from ‘cui primum’) Cicero suggests that it was divine providence that made Clodius act against Milo so that he would be eliminated by Milo as the only instrument that God had left to save the city. He leaves us with the reminder that if Clodius had won the fight, freedom would be lost by the people and gained by Clodius.

§85 text

non est humano consilio, ne mediocri quidem, iudices, deorum immortalium cura res illa perfecta. religiones mehercule ipsae, quae illam beluam cadere viderunt, commosse se videntur et ius in illo suum retinuisse. vos enim iam, Albani tumuli atque luci, vos, inquam, imploro atque obtestor, vosque, Albanorum obrutae arae sacrorum populi Romani sociae et aequales, quas ille praeceps amentia caesis prostratisque sanctissimis lucis substructionum insanis molibus oppresserat; vestrae tum irae, vestrae religiones viguerunt, vestra vis valuit, quam ille omni scelere polluerat; tuque ex tuo edito monte, Latiaris sancte Iuppiter, cuius ille lacus, nemora finesque saepe omni nefario stupro et scelere macularat, aliquando ad eum puniendum oculos aperuisti; vobis illae, vobis vestro in conspectu serae, sed iustae tamen et debitae poenae solutae sunt.

--------------------------------------------------------

§85 translationIt was not by human planning that that matter was accomplished, gentlemen of the jury, nor inded by ordinary providence of the immortal gods. By Hercules, the sacred places themselves which saw that monster fall seem to have stirred themselves and asserted their rights over him. For now to you, Alban hills and groves – to you, I say – I appeal and pray, and to you, the demolished altars of the Alban people, allies of the sacred rites of the Roman people and their equal in age, which he, reckless in his madness, after felling and levelling the most holy groves, loaded with the crazy structures of his building project. Then it was that your anger, your holy presence was roused, and your power, which he had desecrated by all his wickedness, exerted itself; and you, holy Jupiter Latiaris, whose lakes, groves and precincts he had often stained with all his unspeakable depravitiy and crime, from your lofty hill you opened your eyes to punish him at last. To you, yes to you, and in your sight, that long-delayed but nonetheless just and deserved punishment has been paid.

§85 notes

illam beluamClodius cf nefaria belua §32

Albani tumuli atque luciCicero appeals to the groves and hills of Alba, where Clodius was killed. The town of Alba had been destroyed centuries before but its ancient cults were presereved at nearby Bovillae. Jupiter Latiaris (Jupiter of Latium) was worshipped on Mons Albanus (the ‘lofty Latin hill’), the ancient religious centre of the Latins (the people of Latium).

religionesDifficult word to translate: early in the section it implies the holy places associated with religious rites; later it implies the holiness of the places inhabited by the gods. There is a mixture of concepts involved in the word – that which binds one in a sense of duty to worship the god; that which is to be respected for its power or holiness; that which is ‘taboo’ or to be respected for being dangerous but at the same time to be honoured.

substructionum insanis molibus oppresseratClodius seems to have used the altars as part of the load-bearing (‘moles’ implies weight; ‘oppresserat’ implies piling weight on top of) foundations to his building project in §53. Note also the use of amentia (+praeceps) and insanis here – Clodius was without conscience and any sense of what was right or reasonable (as made clearer in what follows, e.g. ‘nefario stupro et scelere’).

serae, sed iustae tamen et debitae poenae solutae suntthe words perhaps imply that Clodius’ time was up

§86 text

nisi forte hoc etiam casu factum esse dicemus, ut ante ipsum sacrarium Bonae deae, quod est in fundo T. Sergi Galli, in primis honesti et ornati adulescentis, ante ipsam, inquam, Bonam deam, cum proelium commisisset, primum illud volnus acciperet,quo taeterrimam mortem obiret, ut non absolutus iudicio illo nefario videretur, sed ad hanc insignem poenam reservatus. nec vero non eadem ira deorum hanc eius satellitibus iniecit amentiam, ut sine imaginibus, sine cantu atque ludis, sine exequiis, sine lamentis, sine laudationibus, sine funere, oblitus cruore et luto, spoliatus illius supremi diei celebritate, cui cedere inimici etiam solent, ambureretur abiectus. non fuisse credo fas clarissimorum virorum formas illi taeterrimo parricidae aliquid decoris afferre, neque ullo in loco potius mortem eius lacerari, quam in quo esset vita damnata.

--------------------------------------------------------

§86 translationUnless, perhaps, we are to say that even this happened by chance – that it was in front of the actual shrine of the Good Goddess, which is on the estate of Titus Sergius Gallus, an especially honourable and accomplished young man, so that it was in front of the Good Goddess herself, I should say, that, when he had initiated the fight, he received that first wound by which he met his most abominable death. It was not so that he should seem to have been acquitted by that scandalous verdict but that he had been kept for this exceptional punishment. Surely, too, it was that same anger of the gods that inspired this madness into his followers: that without masks, without dirges or games, without funeral rites, without lamentations, without eulogies, without funeral ceremony, covered in blood and dirt and deprived of the solemnity of that last moment which even enemies are accustomed to allow, he was burned after being thrown into the street. I believe it was not the will of the gods that the ancestral images of the most distinguished men should lend any dignity to that abominable assassin nor that his dead body should be abused in any place other than that in which his life had been condemned.

§ 86 notes

Bonae deaeBona Dea trial refs §§46, 55 & 72 (he was acquitted in 61BC - absolutus iudicio illo nefario)

T. Sergi Gallinot otherwise known (the flattery of him may imply he has been a witness and spoken as Cicero would like.

primum illud volnusHe implies that Cl died by the only wound he received. Cicero makes every effort not to mention him being dragged out of the inn on Milo’s orders. ‘primum’ is a loaded word – why mention it, except, perhaps to imply that the first wound was the fatal one, whatever else may be said (and it was struck by Milo’s loyal slaves).

ut sine imaginibus...Cicero here repeats some of what he said in §33 but making a different point. Roman funeral traditions included the use of masks and images of one’s ancestors carried in procession at aristocratic funerals (they were made of wax and kept in the atrium, to be displayed on grand occasions and at funerals; only those of high standing were allowed them, such as curule magistrates and old families).

abiectuscan only refer to being dragged out of the inn at Bovillae (C seems to suggest here that it was his followers who did this, rather than Milo’s men); ambureretur refers to his cremation in the Senate House (burnt down in the process – see §90 and Asc33.

§87 textdura medius fidius mihi iam Fortuna populi Romani et crudelis videbatur, quae tot annos illum in hanc rem publicam insultare pateretur. polluerat stupro sanctissimas religiones, senatus gravissima decreta perfregerat, pecunia se a iudicibus palam redemerat, vexarat in tribunatu senatum, omnium ordinum consensu pro salute rei publicae gesta resciderat, me patria expulerat, bona diripuerat, domum incenderat, liberos, coniugem meam vexarat, Cn. Pompeio nefarium bellum indixerat, magistratuum privatorumque caedes effecerat, domum mei fratris incenderat, vastarat Etruriam, multos sedibus ac fortunis eiecerat; instabat, urgebat; capere eius amentiam civitas, Italia, provinciae, regna non poterant; incidebantur iam domi leges, quae nos servis nostris addicerent; nihil erat cuiusquam, quod quidem ille adamasset, quod non hoc anno suum fore putaret.

--------------------------------------------------------

§87 translationThe fortune of the Roman people had begun to seem to me to be harsh and cruel, as heaven is my witness, in that she allowed that man to make taunts against the State for so many years. He had desecrated the most sacred rites with his immoral act, he had broken the most solemn decrees of the Senate, he had blatantly bribed his way out of the hands of juries, he had harrassed the Senate in his position as tribune, he had cancelled measures taken with the consent of all orders for the welfare of the State. As for me, he had driven me from my homeland, had destroyed my property, set fire to my house, harrassed my children and my wife. He had wickedly declared war on Cnaeus Pompeius, he had brought about the slaughter of magistrates and private citizens, he had set fire to my brother’s house, he had ravaged Etruria, he had deprived many of their property and fortunes and went pressing on and on. The State, Italy, the provinces and our client-kingdoms could not contain his madness. Already, at his house, laws were being inscribed that were to make us subject to our slaves. There was nothing belonging to anyone which he, in fact, had not coveted and which he thought could not be his within the year.

§ 87 notes

Most of the crimes in this section have been mentioned already (§§72ff). After Cicero left Italy, Clodius destroyed his house at Rome and his villas at Tusculum and Formiae and further annoyed his wife and family.In a letter to Atticus (I.6) Cicero shows the corruption of the jury which tried Cl for profanation (Bona Dea).

polluerat...note the lack of conjunctions and the repetitive pluperfects

gestameasures enacted to take action against Catiline; resciderat – these were repealed in that Cicero was then driven from Rome in 58BC by a law enacted by Cl as tribune for executing those involved in the Catilinarian conspiracy (one of C’s greatest achievements).

caedesexaggeration – magistrates were wounded in the street-fighting but none killed; only one ‘civis’ is alleged to have been slaughtered by Cl. Cicero uses ‘effecerat’ rather than ‘fecerat’ since the deeds were at Cl’s bidding not by his hand.

domum mei fratris incenderatafter Cicero’s return to Rome (Letter to Atticus 4.3,2)

eiecerat; instabat, urgebat; caperejuxtaposition of verbs

incidebantur iam domi leges, quae nos servis nostris addicerentWhen laws were passed, they were inscribed on bronze and set up in the Capitol; C represents Cl as so sure of himself (even though he was not yet elected as praetor) and of getting his laws passed that he had them ready. The law being referred to here involved the distribution of votesof freedmen among all thirty-five tribes instead of merely the four urban tribes – so that their votes would count for more and might turn a narrow democratic minority into a majority. At §89 he adds that Cl was also proposing a large-scale manumission of slaves, with the new freedmen becoming clients of himself rather than of their former masters. Cicero is trying to condense it to make it sound as though Cl was trying to give slaves the vote.

§88 textobstabat eius cogitationibus nemo praeter Milonem. illum ipsum, qui obstare poterat, novo reditu in gratiam quasi devinctum arbitrabatur; Caesaris potentiam suam esse dicebat; bonorum animos in meo casu contempserat; Milo unus urgebat. hic di immortales, ut supra dixi, mentem illi perdito ac furioso dederunt, ut huic faceret insidias. aliter perire pestis illa non potuit; numquam illum res publica suo iure esset ulta. senatus, credo, praetorem eum circumscripsisset. ne cum solebat quidem id facere, in privato eodem hoc aliquid profecerat.

--------------------------------------------------------

§88 translation

Standing in the way of his schemes was no one except Milo. That one great man who could stand in his way he considered to be, as it were, bound by gratitude at their recent reconciliation. As for Caesar’s power, Clodius said it was his; he had shown contempt for the feelings of good men by my downfall; Milo alone was at his heels. At this point the immortal gods, as I said earlier, put it into the mind of that reckless madman to lay an ambush for my client. Otherwise that menace couldn’t have died; never would the State have taken its revenge upon him by its own powers. The Senate, I suppose, would have restrained him as praetor! Not even in the days when it was accustomed to doing that did it achieve anything against this same man when he was a private citzen.

§ 88 notes

Milonem. illum ipsumnote the juxtaposition – Milo and Pompey (tho we might think he was going on to desc Milo further.

illum ipsum...arbitrabaturPompey and Clodius were reconciled in 56BC (see § 21). The tone here is critical of Pompey for failing to stand up to Cl (cf §73).

ut supra dixisee §84

perdito ac furioso pestis note the language he chooses to describe Cl (cf belua; pernicies)

credoas often in C, this implies he does not think so – ironic/sarcastic and so often easier to render as a rhetorical question.

ne cum solebat quidem id facere, in privato eodem hoc aliquid profeceratThe senate had a certain rather vague right of control over the action of magistrates. It was a consilium publicum (see §90) which the higher magistrates were constitutionally, though not legally, bound to consult. If they did not do so, the senate at least attempted, generally through a tribune, to call them to order; but the efficacy of such an attempt, as this passage shows, depended very much on the political situation of the moment. The reference in the senate’s failure to control the action of Cl as a privatus (i.e. when out of office) is to Cl’s turbulent opposition to the proposals for Cicero’s recall.

§89 textan consules in praetore coercendo fortes fuissent? primum Milone occiso habuisset suos consules; deinde quis in eo praetore consul fortis esset, per quem tribunum virtutem consularem crudelissime vexatam esse meminisset? oppressisset omnia, possideret, teneret; lege nova, quae est inventa apud eum cum reliquis legibus Clodianis, servos nostros libertos suos fecisset; postremo, nisi eum di immortales in eam mentem inpulissent, ut homo effeminatus fortissimum virum conaretur occidere, hodie rem publicam nullam haberetis.

--------------------------------------------------------

§89 translation

Or would the consuls have been courageous in keeping the praetor in check? In the first place, after killing Milo Clodius would have had his own sort of consuls; then, what consul would have been courageous enough against Clodius the praetor through whom, he would remember, even when he was a tribune, there had been the most cruel persecution of the virtue of consular rank? He would have controlled, been in possession of and owned everything. By a new law which was found in his house, along with the rest of his Clodian legislation, he would have had made our slaves his freedmen. Finally, if the immortal gods had not put him into such frame of mind that, as an effeminate creature he should attempt to kill a real man of true courage, then today you wouldn’t even have a Republic.

§ 89 notes

virtutem consularemi.e. Cicero

servos nostros libertos suos fecissetsee note on §87

§90 textan ille praetor, ille vero consul, si modo haec templa atque ipsa moenia stare eo vivo tamdiu et consulatum eius exspectare potuissent, ille denique vivus mali nihil fecisset, qui mortuus uno ex suis satellitibus [Sex. Clodio] duce curiam incenderit? quo quid miserius, quid acerbius, quid luctuosius vidimus, templum sanctitatis, amplitudinis, mentis, consili publici, caput urbis, aram sociorum, portum omnium gentium, sedem ab universo populo concessam uni ordini inflammari, excindi, funestari, neque id fieri a multitudine imperita, quamquam esset miserum id ipsum, sed ab uno? qui cum tantum ausus sit ustor pro mortuo, quid signifer pro vivo non esset ausus?

--------------------------------------------------------

§90 translationOr if he had been praetor, and what is more, consul (if only these temples and these very walls could, with him alive, have stood for so long and waited for his consulship), if he had just stayed alive, would he have done nothing bad – he who when dead, by the leadership of one of his minions, Sextus Clodius, set fire to the senate-house? What have we seen that is more pitiable than this, what more painful, what more distressing? The shrine of holiness, of majesty, of wisdom, of public policy; the head of the City, refuge of its allies, haven of all nations, the dwelling-place accorded to a single Order by the whole people, burned, destroyed, desecrated – not done by an ignorant mob, although that would have been sickening in itself, but by one man! Since this man dared to go so far for a dead man as his cremator, what would he not have dared to do for him as his gang-leader if he had lived?

§ 90 notes

[Sex. Clodio]

Sextus Clodius = Sextus/Sextius Cloelius (not to be confused with Publius Clodius Pulcher, the dead man), the gang-leader of Clodius who had the body burned in the senate-house (Asc 33).

templum sanctitatis...an extensive and extraordinary description of what the senate-house represented in the Roman mind (or what C wants it to). The senate-house was a consecrated area (made so by ritual of the augurs, like the rostra in the forum).

ustorthe correct term for one in charge of the cremation of a corpse.

Read the rest of the speech in translation and see also Colson’s analysis.

Study Asconius’ account.

Study Berry’s introduction.

Learn everything like a wild thing!!

NB End of Part (ii) of A Level prescription