NICOLAUS OF DAMASCUS’
LIFE OF AUGUSTUS

Translated with a Commentary

A Dissertation submitted to the Board of University Studies of the Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

By

Clayton M. Hall

1922

In preparing this translation of the Life of Augustus, the text of L. Dindorf, Historici Graeci Minores, Leipsic 1871, vol. 1, has been used as a basis. Suggestions of K. Müller, Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, Paris 1874, vol. 3, pp. 427 ff., and of N. Piccolos, Nicolas de Damas, Vie de César, Paris 1850, have been found of value. The last named work treats only of the section found in the ‘Codex Escorialensis’, namely chapters 16 to 31. In cases of variation among these three editors, the preferred reading has been duly indicated in the commentary; departures from their texts have also been noted. Works which have been of value in preparing the commentary have been fully cited therein.

To obviate the confusion between the elder and the younger Caesar, which exists through the excerpt, it has been found expedient to refer to the later Augustus as Octavius uniformly until his arrival in Italy from Apollonia, when he became acquainted with the contents of Caesar’s will, and thereafter as Octavian.

All the references to Appian are to his ‘Civil Wars’.

The writer here wishes to express his obligation to Professor T. Frank, under whose direction this work was undertaken, to Professor W. P. Mustard, who has kindly read the entire manuscript of the translation, and to Professors C. W. E. Miller and D. M. Robinson.

1.Men gave him this name[1] in view of his claim to honor; and, scattered over islands and continents, through city and tribe, they revere him by building temples and by sacrificing to him,[2] thus requiting him for his great virtue and acts of kindness toward themselves. For this man, having attained preeminent power and discretion, ruled over the greatest number of people within the memory of man, established the furthest boundaries for the Roman Empire, and settled securely not only the tribes of Greeks and barbarians, but also their dispositions; at first with arms but afterward even without arms, by attracting them of their own free will. By making himself known through kindness he persuaded them to obey him. The names of some of them men had never heard before, nor had they been subject within the memory of anyone, but he subdued them: all those that live as far as the Rhine[3] and beyond the Ionian[4] Sea and the Illyrian peoples. These are called Pannonians and Dacians.[5] (See the work: ‘Concerning Brave Honest Deeds.’)[Pg 2][6]

2.To set forth the full power of this man’s intelligence and virtue, both in the administration which he exercised at Rome and in the conduct of great wars both domestic and foreign, is a subject for competition in speech and essay, that men may win renown by treating it well. I myself shall relate his achievements, so that all can know the truth. First I shall speak of his birth and breeding, his parents, his nurture and education from infancy, by means of which he came to such an estate.[7]

His father was Caius Octavius, a man of senatorial rank.[8] His forebears, renowned for both wealth[9] and justice, left their estates to him, an orphan, at their death.[10] His guardians[11] spent his money, but he remitting his just claims was satisfied with the remainder.

3.Octavius at the age of about nine years was an object of no little admiration to the Romans, exhibiting as he did great excellence of nature, young though he was; for he gave an oration[12] before a large crowd and received much applause from grown men. After his grandmother’s death he was brought up by his mother Atia[13] and her husband Lucius Philippus, who was a descendant of the conquerors of Philip of Macedonia.[Pg 3][14] At Philippus’ house, as if at his father’s, Octavius was reared and showed great promise, already seeming to be treated with respect by his comrades, the children of highest birth. Many of them associated with him, and even not a few of the youths who had hopes to undertake affairs of state. Daily many lads, men, and boys of his own age attended him whether he rode on horseback outside of the town or went to the house of his relations or of any other person; for he exercised his mind with the finest practices and his body with both genteel and warlike pursuits; and more quickly than his teachers he himself applied his lesson to the facts in hand, so that for this reason also much praise redounded to him in the city.[15] Both his mother and her husband Philippus took care of him, inquiring each day from the instructors[16] and curators whom they had placed in charge of the boy what he had accomplished, how far he had advanced, or how he had spent the day and with whom he had associated.

4.At the time when the Civil War had laid hold on the city,[17] his mother Atia and Philippus quietly sent Octavius off to one of his father’s country places.[18]

He entered the forum, aged about fourteen, to[Pg 4] put off the toga praetextata and assume the toga virilis, this being a token of his becoming registered as a man.[19] Then while all the citizens looked upon him, because of his comeliness and very evidently noble descent, he sacrificed to the gods and was registered in the sacred college in the place of Lucius Domitius, who had died.[20] The people indeed had very eagerly elected[21] him to this position. Accordingly, he performed the sacrifice, adorned with the toga virilis and at the same time the honors of a very high priestly office.[22] Nevertheless, though he was registered as of age according to law, his mother would not let him leave the house other than as he did before, when he was a child, and she made him keep to the same mode of life and sleep in the same apartment as before. For he was of age only by law and in other respects was taken care of as a child. He did not change the fashion of his clothes, but continued to use the Roman garb.[23]

5.He went to the temples on the regular days, but after dark on account of his youthful charm, seeing that he attracted many women by his comeliness and high lineage; though often tempted by them he seems never to have been enticed. Not only did the watchful care of his mother, who guarded him and forbade[Pg 5] his wandering, protect him but he too was prudent now that he was advancing in age. During the Latin festival when the consuls had to ascend the Alban Mount to perform the customary sacrifices,[24] the priests meanwhile succeeding to the jurisdiction of the consuls, Octavius sat on the tribunal in the centre of the forum.[25] And there came many people on legal business[26] and many on no business at all except for a sight of the boy; for he was well worth beholding especially when he assumed the dignity and honorable aspect of office.

6.Caesar had by this time completed the wars in Europe,[27] had conquered Pompey in Macedonia,[28] had taken Egypt,[29] had returned from Syria and the Euxine[30] sea, and was intending to advance into Libya[31] in order to put down what was left of war over there; and Octavius wanted to take the field with him in order that he might gain experience in the practice of war. But when he found that his mother Atia was opposed he said nothing by way of argument but remained at home. It was plain that Caesar, out of solicitude for him, did not wish him to take the field yet, lest he might bring on illness to a weak body through changing his mode of life and thus permanently injure his health. For[Pg 6] this cause he took no part in the expedition.

7.After finishing that war also, Caesar returned to Rome,[32] having granted pardon to a very few of the captives who fell to him because they had not learned wisdom in the earlier wars.[33] Then the following incident occurred: There was a particular associate and friend of Octavius, Agrippa,[34] who had been educated at the same place and who was a very special friend of his. His brother was with Cato and treated with much respect; he had participated in the Libyan War, but was at this time taken captive. Although Octavius had never yet asked anything of Caesar he wanted to beg the prisoner off, but he hesitated because of modesty and at the same time because he saw how Caesar was disposed toward those who had been captured in that war. However, he made bold to ask it, and had his request granted. Thereupon he was very glad at having rescued a brother for his friend and he was praised by others for employing his zeal and right of intercession first of all for a friend’s safety.

8.After this, Caesar celebrated his triumphs for the Libyan War and the others which he had fought;[35] and he ordered the young Caesar, whom he had now adopted, and who was in a way a son even by nature, on account of[Pg 7] the closeness of their relationship,[36] to follow his chariot, having bestowed upon him military decorations, as if he had been his aide in war. Likewise at the sacrifices and when entering the temples he stationed him at his side and he ordered the others to yield precedence to him. Caesar already bore the rank of Imperator, which was the highest according to the Roman usage,[37] and he was highly esteemed in the state. The boy, being his companion both at the theatre and at the banquets, and seeing that he conversed kindly with him, as if with his own son, and having by this time become somewhat more courageous, when many of his friends and citizens asked him to intercede for them with Caesar, in matters in which they were in need of aid, looking out for the opportune moment he respectfully asked and was successful; and he became of great value to many of his kinsfolk, for he took care never to ask a favor at an inopportune time, nor when it was annoying to Caesar. And he displayed not a few sparks of kindness and natural intelligence.

9.Caesar wished Octavius to have the experience of directing the exhibition of theatrical productions (for there were two theatres,[38] the one Roman, over which he himself had charge, and the other Greek).[Pg 8] This he turned over to the care of Octavius. The latter, wishing to exhibit interest and benevolence in the matter, even in the hottest and longest days, never left his post before the end of the play; with the result that he fell ill, for he was young and unaccustomed to toil. Being very ill, every one felt considerable apprehension regarding him, lest a constitution such as his might suffer some mishap, and Caesar most of all. Accordingly, every day he either called himself and encouraged him or else sent friends to do so, and he kept physicians in continuous attendance. On one occasion word was brought to him while he was dining that Octavius was relaxed and was dangerously ill. He sprang up and ran barefooted to the place where the patient was, and in great anxiety and with great emotion questioned the physicians, and he sat down by the bedside himself. When Octavius’ full recovery[39] was brought about he showed much joy.

10.While Octavius was convalescent, still weak physically though entirely out of danger, Caesar had to take the field on an expedition[40] in which he had previously the intention of taking the boy. This however he could not now do on account of his attack of sickness. Accordingly, he left him behind in the care of[Pg 9] a number of persons who were to take particular charge of his mode of life; and giving orders that if Octavius should grow strong enough, he was to follow him, he went off to the war. The eldest son of Pompeius Magnus had got together a great force[41] in a short time, contrary to the expectations of everyone, with the intention of avenging his father’s death, and, if possible, of retrieving his father’s defeat. Octavius, left behind in Rome, in the first place gave his attention to gaining as much physical strength as possible, and soon he was sufficiently robust. Then he set out from home toward the army, according to his uncle’s instructions (for that is what he called him). Many were eager to accompany him on account of his great promise but he rejected them all, even his mother herself, and selecting the speediest and strongest of his servants he hastened on his journey and with incredible despatch he covered the long road and approached Caesar, who had already completed the whole war in the space of seven months.[42]

11.When Octavius reached Tarraco it was hard to believe that he had managed to arrive in so great a tumult of war. Not finding Caesar there, he had to endure more trouble and danger. He caught up with[Pg 10] Caesar in Spain near the city of Calpia.[43] Caesar embraced him as a son and welcomed him, for he had left him at home, ill, and he now unexpectedly saw him safe from both enemies and brigands. In fact, he did not let him go from him, but he kept him at his own quarters and mess. He commended his zeal and intelligence[44] inasmuch as he was the first of those who had set out from Rome to arrive. And he made the point of asking him concerning many things in the course of their conversation, for he was anxious to make a trial of his understanding; and finding that he was sagacious, intelligent, and concise in his replies and that he always answered to the point, his esteem and affection for him increased. After this they had to sail for Carthago Nova, and arrangements were made whereby Octavius embarked in the same boat as Caesar, with five slaves, but, out of affection, he took three of his companions aboard in addition to the slaves, though he feared that Caesar would be angry when he found this out. However, the reverse was the case, for Caesar was pleased in that Octavius was fond of his comrades and he commended him because he always liked to have present with him men who were observant and who tried to attain[Pg 11] to excellence; and because he was already giving no little thought to gaining a good reputation at home.

12.Caesar duly arrived at Carthago Nova, intending to meet with those who were in need of him. A great many came to see him, some for the purpose of settling any differences they might have with certain persons, others because of matters of civil administration, others in order to obtain the rewards for deeds of courage which they had performed. Regarding these matters he gave them audience. Many other officers had congregated there also. The Saguntini came to Octavius asking for assistance, for there were a number of charges against them. He acted as their spokesman, and speaking before Caesar skillfully secured their release from the charges. He sent them home delighted, singing his praises to everyone and calling him their savior. Thereupon many people approached him, asking for his patronage, and he proved of considerable value to them. Some he relieved of the charges brought against them, for others he secured rewards, and he placed still others in offices of state. His kindness, humanity, and the prudence he had revealed at these gatherings were subjects of comment to all. In fact, Caesar himself cautiously....[Pg 12][45]

13.... of silver, according to the ancestral custom;[46] nor to associate with young fellows who drank freely, nor to remain at banquets till nightfall, nor to dine before the tenth hour, except at the house of Caesar or Philippus or Marcellus,[47] his sister’s husband, a man of sobriety and of the best Roman descent. Modesty, which one might assume was fitting for one of that age (for nature has assigned it an earlier place than the other virtues) was apparent in his actions and continued during his whole life. Therefore Caesar made much of him and not, as some think, entirely because of relationship. Some time before he had decided to adopt him, but fearing that elated at the hope of such good fortune, as those usually are who are brought up in wealth, he might become forgetful of virtue and depart from his accustomed mode of life, Caesar concealed his intention but he adopted him as son in his will[48] (for he had no male children of his own) and made him residuary legatee of his entire estate, after bequeathing one fourth of his property to friends and townsmen, as was afterwards known.[49]

14.Octavius asked permission to go home to see his mother, and when it was granted, he set out. When he reached the Janiculan hill near Rome, a man who claimed[Pg 13] to be the son of Caius Marius came with a large crowd of people to meet him.[50] He had taken also some women who were relatives of Caesar, for he was anxious to be enrolled in the family, and they testified to his descent. He did not succeed in persuading Atia at all, nor her sister, to make any false statement concerning their family; for the families of Caesar and Marius were very close,[51] but this young man was really no relative whatever. So then, he came up to the young Caesar with a great multitude and tried to gain his authority also for being enrolled in the family. The citizens who accompanied him were also earnestly persuaded that he was Marius’ son. Octavius was in quite a quandary and began to consider what he should do. It was a difficult thing to greet a stranger as a relative, one whose origin he did not know, and for whom his mother did not vouch; and on the other hand, to repudiate the youth and the crowd of citizens with him would be very difficult particularly for one so modest as he. Accordingly, he quietly answered and dismissed the fellow, saying that Caesar was the head of their family, and the chief of the state and of the whole Roman government. He should therefore go to him and explain to him the kinship, and if he convinced[Pg 14] Caesar, then both they and the other relations would accede to his decision quite convinced; otherwise there could be no ground for their connection with him. In the meanwhile, until Caesar decided, he should not come to Octavius nor ask for anything that might be expected of a relative. Thus sensibly he answered and everyone there commended him; nevertheless the young fellow followed him all the way home.

15.When he arrived in Rome he lodged near the house of Philippus and his mother and passed his time with them, seldom leaving them, except at times when he wished to invite some of his young friends to dine with him; but that was not often. While he was in the city, he was declared a patrician by the senate.[52] Octavius lived soberly and in moderation; and his friends knew of something else about him that was remarkable. For an entire year at the very age at which youths, particularly those of wealth, are most wanton, he abstained from sexual gratification out of regard for both his voice and his strength. (End of the history of Nicolaus Damascenus and of the life of the young Caesar. Concerning virtue and vice.)[53]

16.Octavius spent three months in Rome and then came and sojourned here.[54] He was admired by his[Pg 15] friends and companions, revered by everyone in the city, and praised by his instructors.[55] In the fourth month of his stay, a freedman came from home, in excitement and dismay, sent by his mother and carrying a letter which said that Caesar had been killed in the senate by Cassius and Brutus and their accomplices. She asked her son to return to her as she did not know what the outcome of affairs would be. She said he must show himself a man now and consider what he ought to do and put his plans in action, according to fortune and opportunity. His mother’s letter made all this clear, and the man who brought it gave a similar report. He said he had been sent immediately after Caesar’s murder, and he had wasted no time on the way, so that hearing the news as quickly as possible, Octavius would be able to make his plans accordingly. He added that the relatives of the murdered man were in great danger, and it was necessary to consider first of all how this was to be avoided. The group of murderers was not small, and they would drive out and murder Caesar’s relatives.

When they heard this they were greatly disturbed (it was just about the time that they were going to dinner). Speedily a report spread to those out of[Pg 16] doors and through the whole city, revealing nothing accurately, but only that some great calamity had befallen. Then when the evening was fully come many of the foremost Apollonians came up with torches, asking with kind intent what the news was. After taking counsel with his friends Octavius decided to tell the most distinguished of them, but to send the rabble away. He and his friends did so, and when the crowd was with difficulty persuaded by the leaders to leave, Octavius had the opportunity of taking counsel with his friends (much of the night already having been spent) as to what ought to be done and how he should improve the situation. After thoroughly considering the case, some of his friends advised him to go and join the army in Macedonia; it had been sent out for the Parthian War, and Marcus Acilius[56] was in command of it. They advised him to take the army for the sake of safety, to go to Rome, and to take vengeance upon the murderers. The soldiers would be hostile toward the murderers because they had been fond of Caesar, and their sympathy would increase when they saw the boy. But this seemed a difficult course for a very young man, and too much for his present youth and inexperience, especially since the[Pg 17] disposition of the people toward him was not clear as yet and many enemies were at hand. Hence this suggestion was not adopted.

Avengers of Caesar were expected to appear from among those who in his lifetime had come upon good fortune at his hands or who had received from him power, riches, and valuable gifts, such as they had not hoped for even in dreams. Octavius received advice of various sorts from different people, as is always the case in times when a situation is obscure and unsettled, but he determined to postpone decision in the whole matter until he could see those of his friends who were preeminently mature and wise and secure the aid of their counsel also. He decided therefore to refrain from action, but to go to Rome, and having first arrived in Italy, to find out what had taken place after Caesar’s murder, and to take counsel with the people there concerning the entire affair.

17.His retinue then began preparations for the voyage. Alexander[57] pleading his age and ill health, returned to his home at Pergamum. The inhabitants of Apollonia came in multitudes and for some time affectionately begged Octavius to stay with them,[Pg 18] saying that they would put the city to any use that he wished, out of good will toward him and reverence for the deceased.[58] They thought that it would be better for him to await developments in a friendly city, since so many enemies were abroad. However, since he desired to participate in whatever was done, and to avail himself of any opportunity for action, he did not change his decision, but said that he must set sail. Then he praised the Apollonians, and afterward when he became master of Rome he conferred on them autonomy and immunity and some other not inconsiderable favors, and made it one of the most fortunate of cities.[59] All the people in tears escorted him at his departure, admiring his restraint and wisdom that he had revealed in his sojourn there; and at the same time they were sorry for his lot.

There came to him from the army not a few from the cavalry and infantry, both tribunes and centurions, and many others for the sake of serving him, but some for their own gain. Then they exhorted him to take up arms and they promised that they would take the field with him and persuade others also, in order to avenge Caesar’s death. He commended them, but said that he had no need of them at present; when, however, he[Pg 19] would call them to take vengeance, he asked that they be ready; and they agreed to this.

Octavius put out to sea on ships which were at hand, though it was still quite perilously wintry, and crossing the Ionian Sea, arrived at the nearest promontory of Calabria, where the news regarding the revolution at Rome had not yet been clearly announced to the inhabitants. He came ashore here and started on foot for Lupiae.[60] When he arrived there he met people who had been in Rome when Caesar was buried; and they told him, among other things, that he had been named in the will as Caesar’s son, inheriting three fourths of his property, the remaining share having been set aside to pay the sum of seventy five drachmae to each man in the city.[61] He had enjoined Atia, the youth’s mother, to take charge of his burial, but a great crowd had forced its way into the forum and had there cremated the body and interred the remains. They told Octavius that Brutus and Cassius and the other murderers had taken possession of the Capitol, and were obtaining, through the promise of freedom, the slaves as allies. On the first two days while Caesar’s friends were still panic stricken[62] many men came and joined the murderers;[Pg 20] but when colonists from the neighboring cities (whom Caesar had furnished with grants and had established in those cities) began to come in large numbers and attach themselves to the followers of Lepidus, the master of horse,[63] and to those of Antonius, Caesar’s colleague in the consulship,[64] who were promising to avenge Caesar’s death, most of the conspirators’ group dispersed. The conspirators being thus deserted gathered some gladiators and others who were implacably hostile to Caesar, or who had had a share in the plot. A little later, all these came down from the Capitoline, having received pledges of safety from Antonius who now had a large force, but who for the present had given up his plan to avenge Caesar’s murder. (That was why they were allowed to leave Rome safely and go to Antium.) [65] Even their houses were besieged by the people, not under any leader, but the populace itself was enraged on account of the murder of Caesar, of whom they were fond, and especially when they had seen his bloody garment and newly slain body brought to burial when they had forced their way into the forum and had there interred it.

18.When Octavius heard this he was moved to tears and grief because of his memory and affection for[Pg 21] the man, and his sorrow stirred anew. Then he stopped and waited for other letters from his mother and friends in Rome, although he did not disbelieve those who had reported the events, for he saw no reason why they should fabricate any falsehood. After this he set sail for Brundisium, for he had now learned that none of his enemies were there, though previously he had been suspicious lest the city might be held by some of them, and consequently he had not recklessly approached it directly from the other shore.[66] There arrived from his mother also a letter in which was written an urgent request for him to return to her and the whole household as soon as possible, so that no treachery should come upon him from without, seeing that he had been designated Caesar’s son. It bore out the earlier news, and said that the whole populace was aroused against Brutus and Cassius and their party, and was greatly vexed at what they had done. His step-father Philippus sent him a letter asking him not to take steps to secure Caesar’s bequest but even to retain his own name[67] because of what had happened to Caesar and to live free from politics and in safety. Octavius knew that this advice was given with kind intent, but he thought differently,[Pg 22] as he already had his mind on great things and he was full of confidence; he therefore took upon himself the toil and danger and the enmity of men whom he did not care to please. Nor did he propose to cede to anyone a name or a rule so great as his, particularly with the state on his side and calling him to come into his father’s honors;[68] and very rightly, since both naturally and by law the office belonged to him, for he was the nearest relative and had been adopted as son by Caesar himself, and he felt that to follow the matter up and avenge his death was the proper course to pursue. This is what he thought, and he wrote and so answered Philippus, though he did not succeed in convincing him. His mother Atia when she saw how glorious his fortune was and the extent of the empire rejoiced that it devolved upon her own son; but on the other hand knowing that the undertaking was full of fear and danger, and having seen what had happened to her uncle Caesar, she was not very enthusiastic; so it looked as though she was between the view of her husband Philippus and that of her son. Hence she felt many cares, now anxious when she enumerated all the dangers awaiting one striving for supreme power, and[Pg 23] now elated when she thought of the extent of that power and honor. Therefore she did not dare to dissuade her son from attempting the great deed and effecting a just requital, but still she did not venture to urge him on, because fortune seemed somewhat obscure.[69] She permitted his use of the name Caesar and in fact was the first to assent. Octavian, having made inquiry as to what all his friends thought about this also, without delay accepted both the name and the adoption, with good fortune and favorable omen.[70]

This was the beginning of good both for himself and all mankind, but especially for the state and the entire Roman people. He sent immediately to Asia for the money and means[71] that Caesar had previously despatched for the Parthian War, and when he received it along with a year’s tribute from the people of Asia, contenting himself with the position that had belonged to Caesar[72] he turned the public property over to the state treasury. At that time, too, some of his friends urged him as they had at Apollonia to go to Caesar’s colonies and to levy an army,[73] inducing the men to join an expedition on his behalf by employing the prestige of the great name of Caesar.[Pg 24][74] They declared that the soldiers would gladly follow the leadership of Caesar’s son and would do everything for him; for there persisted among them a wonderful loyalty and good will toward Caesar and a memory of what they had accomplished with him in his lifetime, and they desired under the auspices of Caesar’s name to win the power which they had formerly bestowed upon Caesar. However, the opportunity for this did not seem to be at hand. He therefore turned his attention toward seeking legally, through a senatorial decree, the dignity his father had held;[75] and he was careful not to acquire the reputation of being one who was ambitious and not a law-abiding man. Accordingly, he listened especially to the eldest of his friends and those of the greatest experience, and set out from Brundisium for Rome.[76]

19.From this point my narrative will investigate the manner in which the assassins formed their conspiracy against Caesar and how they worked out the whole affair, and what happened afterward when the whole state was shaken. Accordingly, I shall in the first place rehearse the circumstances of the plot itself, its reasons, and its final momentous outcome. In the next place I shall speak of Octavian on whose[Pg 25] account this narrative was undertaken; how he came into power, and how, after he had taken his predecessor’s place, he employed himself in deeds of peace and war.

At first a few men started the conspiracy,[77] but afterwards many took part, more than are remembered to have taken part in any earlier plot against a commander. They say that there were more than eighty who had a share in it.[78] Among those who had the most influence were: Decimus Brutus, a particular friend of Caesar, Caius Cassius, and Marcus Brutus, second to none in the estimation of the Romans at that time. All these were formerly members of the opposite faction, and had tried to further Pompeius’ interests,[79] but when he was defeated, they came under Caesar’s jurisdiction and lived quietly for the time being; but although Caesar tried to win them over individually by kindly treatment, they never abandoned their hope of doing him harm.[80] He on his part was naturally without grudge against the beaten party, because of a certain leniency of disposition,[81] but they, using to their own advantage his lack of suspicion, by seductive words and pretence of deeds treated him in such a way as to more readily escape[Pg 26] detection in their plot. There were various reasons which affected each and all of them and impelled them to lay hands on the man. Some of them had hopes of becoming leaders themselves in his place if he were put out of the way; others were angered over what had happened to them in the war, embittered over the loss of their relatives, property, or offices of state. They concealed the fact that they were angry, and made the pretense of something more seemly, saying that they were displeased at the rule of a single man and that they were striving for a republican form of government. Different people had different reasons, all brought together by whatever pretext they happened upon.

At first the ringleaders conspired; then many more joined, some of their own accord because of personal grievances, some because they had been associated with the others and wished to show plainly the good faith in their long-standing friendship, and accordingly became their associates. There were some who were of neither of these types, but who had agreed because of the worth of the others, and who resented the power of one man after the long-standing republican constitution. They were very glad not to start the[Pg 27] affair themselves, but were willing to join such company when someone else had initiated proceedings, not even hesitating to pay the penalty if need be. The reputation which had long been attached to the Brutus family was very influential in causing the uprising, for Brutus’ ancestors had overthrown the kings who ruled from the time of Romulus, and they had first established republican government in Rome.[82] Moreover, men who had been friends of Caesar were no longer similarly well disposed toward him when they saw people who were previously his enemies saved by him and given honors equal to their own. In fact, even these others were not particularly well disposed toward him,[83] for their ancient grudges took precedence over gratitude and made them forgetful of their good fortune in being saved, while, when they remembered the good things they had lost in being defeated, they were provoked. Many also hated him because they had been saved by him although he had been irreproachable in his behavior toward them in every respect; but nevertheless, the very thought of receiving as a favor the benefits which as victors they would readily have enjoyed, annoyed them very much.

Then there was another class of men, namely those[Pg 28] who had served with him, whether as officers or privates, and who did not get a share of glory. They asserted that prisoners of war were enrolled among the veteran forces and that they received identical pay. Accordingly, his friends were incensed at being rated as equal to those whom they themselves had taken prisoners, and indeed they were even outranked by some of them. To many, also, the fact that they benefitted at his hands, both by gifts of property and by appointments to offices, was a special source of grievance, since he alone was able to bestow such benefits, and everyone else was ignored as of no importance. When he became exalted through many notable victories (which was fair enough) and began to think himself super human[84] the common people worshipped him, but he began to be obnoxious to the optimates and to those who were trying to obtain a share in the government. And so, every kind of man combined against him: great and small, friend and foe, military and political, every one of whom put forward his own particular pretext for the matter in hand, and as a result of his own complaints each lent a ready ear to the accusations of the others. They all confirmed each other in their conspiracy and they furnished as surety[Pg 29][85] to one another the grievances which they held severally in private against him. Hence, though the number of conspirators became so great, no one dared to give information of the fact. Some say, however, that a little before his death, Caesar received a note in which warning of the plot was given, and that he was murdered with it in his hands before he had a chance to read it, and that it was found among other notes after his death.[86]

20.However, all this became known subsequently. At that time some wished to gratify him by voting him one honor after another, while others treacherously included extravagant honors, and published them, so that he might become an object of envy and suspicion to all.[87] Caesar was of guileless disposition and was unskilled in political practices by reason of his foreign campaigns, so that he was easily taken in by these people, supposing, naturally enough, that their commendations came rather from men who admired him than from men who were plotting against him.[88]

To those who were in authority this measure was especially displeasing: that the people were now rendered powerless to make appointments to office, and that Caesar was given the right of investure to bestow[Pg 30] upon whomsoever he pleased. An ordinance voted not long before provided this.[89] Furthermore, all sorts of rumors were being bandied about in the crowd, some telling one story, others another. Some said that he had decided to establish a capital of the whole empire in Egypt, and that Queen Cleopatra had lain with him and borne him a son, named Cyrus, there. This he himself refuted in his will as false.[90] Others said that he was going to do the same thing at Troy, on account of his ancient connection with the Trojan race.[91]

Something else, such as it was, took place which especially stirred the conspirators against him. There was a golden statue of him which had been erected on the rostra[92] by vote of the people. A diadem appeared on it, encircling the head, whereupon the Romans became very suspicious, supposing that it was a symbol of servitude. Two of the tribunes, Lucius and Caius,[93] came up and ordered one of their subordinates to climb up, take it down, and throw it away. When Caesar discovered what had happened, he convened the senate in the temple of Concordia[94] and arraigned the tribunes, asserting that they themselves had secretly placed the diadem[Pg 31] on the statue, so that they might have a chance to insult him openly and thus get credit for doing a brave deed by dishonoring the statue, caring nothing either for him or for the senate. He continued that their action was one which indicated a more serious resolution and plot: if somehow they might slander him to the people as a seeker after unconstitutional power, and thus (themselves stirring up an insurrection) to slay him. After this address, with the concurrence of the senate he banished them.[95] Accordingly, they went off into exile and other tribunes were appointed in their place. Then the people clamored that he become king and they shouted that there should be no longer any delay in crowning him as such, for Fortune had already crowned him. But Caesar declared that although he would grant the people everything because of their good will toward him, he would never allow this step; and he asked their indulgence for contradicting their wishes in preserving the old form of government, saying that he preferred to hold the office of consul in accordance with the law to being king illegally.[96]

21.Such was the people’s talk at that time. Later, in the course of the winter, a festival was held in[Pg 32] Rome, called Lupercalia,[97] in which old and young men together take part in a procession, naked except for a girdle, and anointed, railing at those whom they meet and striking them with pieces of goat’s hide. When this festival came on Marcus Antonius was chosen director. He proceeded through the forum, as was the custom, and the rest of the throng followed him. Caesar was sitting in a golden chair on the Rostra, wearing a purple toga. At first Licinius[98] advanced toward him carrying a laurel wreath, though inside it a diadem was plainly visible. He mounted up, pushed up by his colleagues (for the place from which Caesar was accustomed to address the assembly was high), and set the diadem down before Caesar’s feet. Amid the cheers of the crowd he placed it on Caesar’s head. Thereupon Caesar called Lepidus, the master of horse, to ward him off, but Lepidus hesitated.[99] In the meanwhile Cassius Longinus, one of the conspirators, pretending to be really well disposed toward Caesar so that he might the more readily escape suspicion, hurriedly removed the diadem and placed it in Caesar’s lap. Publius Casca was also with him.[100] While Caesar kept rejecting it, and among the shouts of the people, Antonius suddenly[Pg 33] rushed up, naked and anointed, just as he was in the procession, and placed it on his head. But Caesar snatched it off, and threw it into the crowd. Those who were standing at some distance applauded this action, but those who were near at hand clamored that he should accept it and not repel the people’s favor. Various individuals held different views of the matter. Some were angry, thinking it an indication of power out of place in a democracy; others, thinking to court favor, approved; still others spread the report that Antonius had acted as he did not without Caesar’s connivance. There were many who were quite willing that Caesar be made king openly. All sorts of talk began to go through the crowd. When Antonius crowned Caesar a second time, the people shouted in chorus, ‘Hail, King;’[101] but Caesar still refusing the crown, ordered it to be taken to the temple of Capitoline Jupiter, saying that it was more appropriate there. Again the same people applauded as before. There is told another story, that Antonius acted thus wishing to ingratiate himself with Caesar, and at the same time was cherishing the hope of being adopted as his son.[102] Finally, he embraced Caesar and gave the crown to some of the men[Pg 34] standing near to place it on the head of the statue of Caesar which was near by. This they did. Of all the occurrences of that time this was not the least influential in hastening the action of the conspirators, for it proved to their very eyes the truth of the suspicions they entertained.

22.Not long after this,[103] the praetor Cinna propitiated Caesar to the extent of securing a decree which allowed the exiled tribunes to return. Though in accordance with the wish of the people they were not to resume their office, but to remain private citizens, yet not excluded from public affairs. Caesar did not prevent their recall, so they returned. Caesar called the annual comitia (for he had the authority of a decree to do so)[104] and appointed Vibius Pansa and Aulus Hirtius as consuls for the ensuing year; for the year after that, Decimus Brutus, one of the conspirators, and Munatius Plancus. Directly after this, another thing happened that greatly aroused the conspirators. Caesar was having a large, handsome forum laid out in Rome, and he had called together the artisans and was letting the contracts for its construction. In the meanwhile up came a procession of Roman nobles, to confer the honors[Pg 35] which had just been voted him by common consent. In the lead was the consul (the one who was Caesar’s colleague at that time),[105] and he carried the decree with him. In front of him were lictors, keeping the crowd back on either side. With the consul came the praetors, tribunes, quaestors, and all the other officials. Next came the senate in orderly formation, and then a multitude of enormous size—never so large. The dignity of the nobles was awe-inspiring—they were entrusted with the rule of the whole empire, and yet looked with admiration on another as if he were still greater. Caesar was seated[106] while they advanced and because he was conversing with men standing to one side, he did not turn his head toward the approaching procession or pay any attention to it, but continued to prosecute the business which he had on hand, until one of his friends, nearby, said, ‘Look at these people coming up in front of you.’ Then Caesar laid down his papers and turned around and listened to what they had come to say. Now among their number were[107] the conspirators, who filled the others with ill-will toward him, though the others were already offended at him because of this incident.[Pg 36]

Then those also were excited who wished to lay hands on him not to recover liberty but to destroy the entire extant system; they were looking for an opportunity to overcome one who seemed to be absolutely invincible. For, although he had participated up to this time in three hundred and two battles in both Asia and Europe, it appeared that he had never been worsted. Since, however, he frequently came out by himself and appeared before them, the hope arose that he could be taken by treachery. They tried to bring about, somehow, the dismissal of his body guard by flattering him when they addressed him, saying that he ought to be considered sacred in the eyes of all and be called ‘pater patriae’;[108] and by proposing decrees to that effect in the hope that he would be thus misled and actually trust to their affection, and that he would dismiss his spearmen in the belief that he was guarded by the good will of everyone. This actually came to pass, and made their task far easier.[109]

23.The conspirators never met to make their plans in the open, but in secret, a few at a time in each other’s houses. As was natural, many plans were proposed and set in motion by them as they considered[Pg 37] how and when they should commit the awful deed. Some proposed to attack him while on his way through the ‘Via sacra’, for he often walked there;[110] others, at the time of the comitia, when he had to cross a certain bridge[111] to hold the election of magistrates in the field before the city. They would so divide their duties by lot that some should jostle him off the bridge and the others should rush upon him and slay him. Others proposed that he be attacked when the gladiatorial shows were held[112] (they were near at hand), for then, because of these contests no suspicion would be aroused in the sight of men armed for the deed. The majority urged that he be killed during the session of the senate, for then he was likely to be alone. There was no admittance to non-members, and many of the senators were conspirators, and carried swords under their togas. This plan was adopted.[113] Fortune had a part in this by causing Caesar himself to set a certain day on which the members of the senate were to assemble to consider certain motions which he wished to introduce. When the appointed day came the conspirators assembled, prepared in all respects. They met in the portico of Pompeius’ theatre, where they sometimes gathered.[Pg 38] Thus the divinity showed the vanity of man’s estate—how very unstable it is, and subject to the vagaries of fortune—for Caesar was brought to the house of his enemy, there to lie, a corpse, before the statue of one whom, now dead, he had defeated when he was alive. And fate becomes a still stronger force if indeed one acknowledges her part in these things: on that day his friends, drawing conclusions from certain auguries, tried to prevent him from going to the senate room, as did also his physicians on account of vertigoes to which he was sometimes subject, and from which he was at that time suffering; and especially his wife Calpurnia, who was terrified by a dream that night. She clung to him and said that she would not let him go out that day. But Brutus, one of the conspirators, though he was at that time thought to be one of his most intimate friends, came up to him and said: ‘What do you say, Caesar? Are you going to pay any attention to a woman’s dreams and foolish men’s omens, a man such as you? Are you going to insult the senate which has honored you and which you yourself convened, by not going out? No; if you take my advice you will dismiss from your mind the dreams of these people and go, for the senate has been in[Pg 40] session since morning, and is awaiting you.’ He was persuaded and went out.

24.Meanwhile the assassins were making ready, some of them stationing themselves beside his chair, others in front of it, others behind it. The augurs brought forward the victims for him to make his final sacrifice before his entry into the senate room. It was manifest that the omens were unfavorable. The augurs substituted one animal after another in the attempt to secure a more auspicious forecast. Finally they said that the indications from the gods were unfavorable and that there was plainly some sort of curse hiding in the victims. In disgust, Caesar turned away toward the setting sun,[114] and the augurs interpreted this action still more unfavorably. The assassins were on hand and were pleased at all this. Caesar’s friends begged that he postpone the present session on account of what the soothsayers had said; and for his part, he was just giving the order[115] to do this, but suddenly the attendants came to summon him, saying that the senate had a quorum. Then Caesar cast a look toward his friends. And Brutus approached him again and said: ‘Come, sir, turn your back on these people’s nonsense and do not postpone the business that deserves[Pg 41] the attention of Caesar and of the great empire but consider your own worth a favorable omen.’ Thus persuading him, he at the same time took him by the hand and led him in, for the senate-chamber was near by. Caesar followed in silence. When he came in and the senate saw him, the members rose out of respect to him. Those who intended to lay hands on him were all about him. The first to come to him was Tullius Cimber, whose brother Caesar had exiled, and stepping forward as though to make an urgent appeal on behalf of his brother, he seized Caesar’s toga, seeming to act rather boldly for a suppliant,[116] and thus prevented him from standing up and using his hands if he so wished. Caesar was very angry, but the men held to their purpose and all suddenly bared their daggers and rushed upon him. First Servilius Casca stabbed him on the left shoulder a little above the collar bone, at which he had aimed but missed through nervousness. Caesar sprang up to defend himself against him, and Casca called to his brother, speaking in Greek in his excitement. The latter obeyed him and drove his sword into Caesar’s side. A moment before Cassius had struck him obliquely across the face. Decimus Brutus struck him through[Pg 42] the thigh. Cassius Longinus was eager to give another stroke, but he missed and struck Marcus Brutus on the hand. Minucius, too, made a lunge at Caesar but he struck Rubrius on the thigh. It looked as if they were fighting over Caesar. He fell, under many wounds, before the statue of Pompey, and there was not one of them but struck him as he lay lifeless, to show that each of them had had a share in the deed, until he had received thirty-five wounds, and breathed his last.[117]

25.A tremendous uproar arose from those who had no knowledge of the plot and who were rushing terror-stricken from the senate house, thinking that the same awful thing was going to happen to themselves also; and from those of Caesar’s associates who were outside and who thought that the whole senate was involved and that a large army was on hand for the purpose; and from those who, ignorant of the affair, were terrified and thrown into confusion from the suddenness of the noise and from what burst upon their view (for all at once the assassins, with bloody daggers in their hands...).[118] The whole place was full of people running and shouting. There was a crowd, too, in the theatre, which got up and[Pg 43] rushed out in disorder (there happened to be a gladiatorial exhibition in progress) knowing nothing definite of what had happened but frightened by the shouting all about them. Some said that the senate was being slaughtered by gladiators, others that Caesar had been murdered and that his army had started to pillage the city; some got one impression, others another. There was nothing clear to be heard, for there was a continuous tumult until the people saw the assassins and Marcus Brutus trying to stop the outcry and exhorting[119] the people to be of good courage, for that no evil had taken place. The sum and substance of his words (as the rest of the assassins also loudly boasted) was that they had slain a tyrant. It was proposed by some of the conspirators that they ought to put out of the way still others who were likely to oppose them and again try to gain control. They say that Marcus Brutus restrained them,[120] declaring that it was not right to kill, for the sake of vague suspicion, people against whom there was no clear charge; and this view prevailed. Then rushing forth the assassins fled in haste through the forum up to the Capitoline, carrying their swords bare and shouting that they had[Pg 44] acted in behalf of common freedom. A great crowd of gladiators and slaves, who had been prepared for the purpose, followed them. There was much running in the streets and through the forum, now that the news that Caesar had been murdered became known to the throng. The city looked as if it had been occupied by an enemy. After the conspirators had ascended the Capitoline, they distributed themselves in a circle about the place and mounted guard, fearing that Caesar’s soldiers would attack them.

26.The body of Caesar lay just where it fell, ignominiously stained with blood—a man who had advanced westward as far as Britain and the Ocean, and who had intended to advance eastward against the realms of the Parthians and Indi,[121] so that, with them also subdued, an empire of all land and sea might be brought under the power of a single head. There he lay, no one daring to remain to remove the body. Those of his friends who had been present had run away, and those who were away remained hidden in their houses, or else changed their clothing and went out into the country districts nearby. Not one of his many friends stood by him, either while he was being slaughtered or afterward, except Calvisius[Pg 45] Sabinus and Censorinus,[122] but these also, though they offered some slight opposition when Brutus and Cassius and their followers made their attack, had to flee because of the greater number of their opponents. All the others looked out for themselves and some even acquiesced in what had occurred. They say that one of them thus addressed the body: ‘Enough of truckling to a tyrant.’ A little later, three slaves,[123] who were nearby, placed the body on a litter and carried it home through the forum, showing, where the covering was drawn back on each side, the hands hanging limp and the wounds on the face. Then no one refrained from tears, seeing him who had lately been honored like a god. Much weeping and lamentation accompanied them from either side, from mourners on the roofs, in the streets, and in the vestibules. When they approached his house, a far greater wailing met their ears, for his wife rushed out with a number of women and servants, calling on her husband and bewailing her lot in that she had in vain counseled him not to go out on that day. But he had met with a fate far worse than she ever expected.

26 b.These were now preparing for his burial, but the assassins had secured a number of gladiators[Pg 46] some time previous to the deed when they were about to attack him and had placed them under arms, between the senate house and the theatre in Pompeius’ arcade. Decimus Brutus had got them ready under the pretext that he wished to seize one of the gladiators who were assembling in that theatre, a man whom he had previously hired. (The contests were taking place at that time,[124] and as he was going to conduct some himself, he pretended that he was jealous of the present exhibitor.) As a matter of fact, this preparation was more with reference to the assassination, so that, in case any resistance should be offered by Caesar’s guards,[125] the conspirators should have assistance at hand. With these gladiators and an additional throng of slaves they descended from the Capitoline. Calling together the people, they decided to test them and the magistrates, finding out how they were regarded by them; whether they were looked upon as having ended a tyranny or as murderers. ...[126] that still greater ills were likely to burst forth in consequence of the late deed; for the action had taken place with no inconsiderable forethought and preparation on the part of those who accomplished it, and on the part of those against whom the plot[Pg 47] was laid; and that there was a considerable number of Caesar’s auxiliary troops and important commanders still left, who would take over the task of carrying out his plans. There was profound silence then because of the unusual nature of the situation, for men’s minds were confused, everyone watching eagerly to see what bold move might first be made in such a crisis, and be the beginning of a revolution. Meanwhile since the people were quietly awaiting the consequences, Marcus Brutus (honored throughout his whole life because of his discretion and the renown of his ancestors and the fairness which he was supposed to have) made the following speech.[127] (See my work: ‘Concerning Public Speeches.’)

27.After this harangue the conspirators withdrew again to the Capitoline and took council[128] as to what ought to be done under the present circumstances. They decided to send envoys to Lepidus and Antonius to persuade them to come to them in the temple[129] and there confer with them in planning the future of the state; and to promise them that everything which they possessed from Caesar’s hands would be considered as authorized gifts, so that there would be no cause for dissent on these grounds.[130] When the envoys[Pg 48] arrived Antonius and Lepidus said that they would answer on the following day. These things were done in the late evening, and a greater confusion laid hold on the city. Everyone saw to his own property, deserting the public interests, for they feared sudden plots and attacks, seeing that the leaders were encamped under arms in opposition to each other; nor was it yet clear to them who would gain complete control. When night came on they dispersed. On the following day the consul Antonius was under arms; and Lepidus,[131] having collected a considerable force of auxiliaries proceeded through the middle of the forum, having decided to avenge Caesar. When those who had previously been in doubt saw this, they joined Antonius and Lepidus, with their respective retinues under arms, and the result was an army of considerable size. There were some who acted thus through fear, not wishing to seem too delighted at Caesar’s death, and at the same time looking to their future interests by joining the consuls.

Many messages were sent to those who had benefitted at Caesar’s hands (whether through grants of dwelling places in cities, through grants of land, or allotments of money) saying that everything would[Pg 49] be changed unless some strenuous efforts were exerted by them as well. Then his friends received many mournful entreaties, reminding those especially who had once taken the field with him how he had suffered death abandoned by his friends, great as he was. Accordingly, many joined the consuls out of compassion and friendship, finding a chance for private gain as well as what would result from a revolution,[132] especially since the course of their opponents seemed to lack vigor and was not what they previously expected it to be when they believed that they had a stronger force. Now it was openly said that Caesar must be avenged, and that this was the only thing to do, and that his death must not go unpunished. Gathering into groups they expressed various views, some suggesting one course, others another.

However, those who advocated a republican form of government were gratified at the whole change, and only blamed Caesar’s murderers because they had not done away with more of the people who were at that time viewed with suspicion, and thus brought about a real liberty; for those who were still left would be likely to give considerable trouble. There were also men who had a reputation for greater foresight,[Pg 50] and who had gained knowledge from experience with what had happened before in Sulla’s time; they cautioned one another to keep to a middle course, for at the time of Sulla those who were thought to have been destroyed, suddenly took fresh courage and drove out their late conquerors. They declared that Caesar would give his murderers and their companions much trouble, even though he was dead, since here was a large force threatening them, with energetic men in charge of it.

Antonius and his associates before preparing for action sent a legation to parley with the forces on the Capitoline, but later, emboldened by the amount of their arms and the number of their men, they felt justified in taking full charge of the government, and ending the disturbance in the city. First of all they took council (having asked their friends to be present) how they ought to act toward the assassins. Lepidus proposed that they should fight them and avenge Caesar.[133] Hirtius thought that they should discuss the matter with them and come to friendly terms. Someone else,[134] supporting Lepidus, expressed the opposite opinion, saying that it would be sacrilegious to pass by the murder of Caesar unavenged,[Pg 51] and furthermore, it would not be safe for all those who had been his friends; ‘for even if the murderers are inactive now, yet as soon as they get more power, they will go still further.’ Antonius favored the proposal of Hirtius, and voted to save them. There were others who urged that they be dismissed from the city under truce.[135]

28.After the great Caesar’s death and burial, his friends counselled Octavian to cultivate Antonius’ friendship, and put him in charge of his interests....[136] And though there were many other contributory causes toward disagreement between them, he[137] seemed the more to incite enmity between them, for he was at odds with Octavian, and a partisan of Antonius. Octavian, however, in no wise frightened, because of his high spirit, gave some exhibitions on the occasion of the festival of Venus Genetrix which his father had established. He again[138] approached Antonius with a number of his friends, requesting that permission be given for the throne and wreath to be set up in his father’s honor. Antonius made the same threat as before, if he did not drop that proposal and keep quiet. Octavian withdrew and made no opposition to the veto of the consul. When[Pg 52] he entered the theatre, however, the people applauded him loudly, and his father’s soldiers, angered because he had been prevented from paying tribute to the honored memory of his father, gave him, as a mark of their approval, one round of applause after another all through the performance. Then he counted out for the people their allotted money, and that secured him their especial good will.[139]

From that day Antonius was manifestly still more ill disposed toward Octavian who stood in the way of the people’s zeal for him. Octavian saw (what had become very plain to him from the present situation) that he was in need of political authority. He also saw that the consuls,[140] secure in much power, were openly resisting him and appropriating still more power for themselves. Even the city treasury, which his father had filled with funds, they had emptied within two months[141] after Caesar’s death, wasting money in large lots on any excuse that offered in the general confusion; and furthermore they were on good terms with the assassins.[142] So Octavian was the only one left to avenge his father, for Antonius let the whole matter pass, and was even in favor of an amnesty for the assassins. A number of men,[Pg 53] indeed, joined Octavian, but many joined Antonius and Dolabella also. There were others who, from a middle ground, tried to foment enmity between them, and in doing so....[143] The chief of these were the following men: Publius, Vibius, Lucius, and especially Cicero.[144] Octavian was not ignorant of the reason why they associated themselves with him, trying to provoke him against Antonius, but he did not repel them, for he wished to have their assistance and a more powerful guard thrown around him, though he was aware that each of these men was very little concerned over public interests but that they were looking about for an opportunity to acquire public office and supreme power. To their mind, the man who had previously enjoyed that power was out of the way, and Octavian was altogether too young and not likely to hold out against so great a tumult, with one man looking out for one thing, another for another, and all of them seizing what they could for their own gain. For with all attention to public welfare put away, and with the foremost citizens separated into many factions, and everyone trying to encompass all the power for himself, or at least as much of it as could be detached, the rule showed[Pg 54] many strange aspects.

Lepidus, who had broken off a part of Caesar’s army and who was trying to seize the command himself, was in nearer Spain; he also held the part of Gaul which borders on the upper sea.[145] Gallia Comata Lucius Munatius Plancus, the consul elect, held with another army.[146] Further Spain was in charge of Gaius Asinius, with another army.[147] Decimus Brutus held Cisalpine Gaul[148] with two legions, against whom Antonius was just preparing to march. Gaius Brutus[149] laid claim to Macedonia,[150] and was just about to cross over to that place from Italy; Cassius Longinus laid claim to Syria, though he had been appointed praetor for Illyria.[151] So many were the armies that had been assembled at that time, so many the commanders in charge, each of whom was trying to get complete power into his own hands without consideration of law and justice, every matter being decided according to the amount of force that was available for application in each case. Octavian alone, to whom all the power had justly been bequeathed,[152] in accordance with the authority of him who had obtained it in the first instance, and because of his relationship to him, was without any share of authority[Pg 55] whatever, and he was buffeted between the political envy and greed of men who were lying in wait to attack him and seize the supreme command. Divine providence finally ordered these things aright. But for the present fearing for his life, knowing Antonius’ attitude toward him and yet quite unable to change it, Octavian remained at home and awaited his opportunity.

29.The first move in the city came from his father’s soldiers,[153] who resented Antonius’ contempt for them. At first they discussed their own forgetfulness of Caesar in allowing his son to be thus insulted, that son for whom they all ought to act as guardians if they were to take any account of what was just and righteous. Then gathering in a great company and reproaching themselves still more bitterly they set out for Antonius’ house (for he also was relying on them) and made some plain statements to him: that he ought to treat Octavian more fairly and keep in mind his father’s instructions; that it was their sacred duty not to overlook these, but to carry out even the details of his memoranda, not to mention supporting the man he had named as his son and successor; that they saw that to Antonius and Octavian[Pg 56] a reconciliation would be most advantageous at the present time because of the multitude of foes pressing on from every side. After this speech Antonius in order not to seem to be opposing their endeavor, for he happened to be really in need of their services,[154] said that he approved of and desired that very course, if only Octavian would also act with moderation and render him the honor which was his due; that he was ready to have a conference with him in their presence and within their hearing. They were satisfied with this and agreed to conduct him into the Capitol and act as mediators in the reconciliation if he should so desire. He then assented and immediately went up into the temple of Jupiter, and sent them after Octavian.

They were pleased and went to his house in a great body, so that he felt some anxiety when it was announced that there was a large crowd of soldiers outside and that some were in the house looking for him. In his agitation, he first went upstairs with his friends who happened to be present, and looking down, asked the men what they wanted and why they had come, and then he discovered that they were his own soldiers. They answered that[Pg 57] they had come for his own good and that of his whole party, if he also was willing to forget what Antonius had done, for his actions had not been pleasing to them either; that he and Antonius ought to put aside all resentment and be reconciled simply and sincerely. Then one of them called out in a somewhat louder voice and bade him be of good cheer and be assured that he had inherited all their support, for they thought of his late father as of a god, and would do and suffer anything for his successors. Another one shouted out still more loudly and said that he would make away with Antonius with his own hands if he did not observe the provisions of Caesar’s will and keep faith with the senate. Octavian, encouraged at this, went downstairs to them, and embracing them showed much pleasure at their eager good will toward him. They seized him and led him in triumph through the forum to the Capitol, vieing with each other in their zeal, some because of their dislike of Antonius’ rule and others out of reverence for Caesar and his heir; others led on (and rightly enough) by the hope of obtaining great advantages at his hands, and still others who were eager for revenge on the assassins, believing that this would be accomplished[Pg 58] most readily through the boy if they had the assistance of the consul also. In fact, all those who approached him advised him out of good will not to be contentious but to think of their own safety, and how he could gain more supporters, remembering how unexpected Caesar’s death had been. Octavian heard all this and saw that the people’s zeal for him was natural; he then entered the Capitol and saw there many more of his father’s soldiers, on whom Antonius was relying, but who were really far better disposed toward himself, if Antonius should try to injure him in any way. The majority of the throng withdrew and the two leaders with their friends were left to discuss the situation.[155]

30. When Octavian went home after his reconciliation with Antonius, the latter, left to himself, became provoked again at seeing the good will of all the soldiers inclining very much toward Octavian.[156] For they held that he was Caesar’s son and that he had been proclaimed his heir in his will, that he was called by the same name and that he exhibited excellent promise from the very energy of his nature, of which Caesar had taken cognizance in bringing about his adoption no less than of his degree of[Pg 59] kinship, in the belief that he alone might be entrusted with preserving all of Caesar’s authority and the dignity of his house. When Antonius reflected on all this he changed his mind again, especially when he saw the Caesarian soldiers desert him right before his eyes and escort Octavian in a body from the temple. Some thought that he would not have refrained from apprehending Octavian, had he not been in fear of the soldiers, lest they should set on him and mete out punishment, easily diverting all his faction from him; for each of them had an army which was waiting to see how things would turn out. Reflecting on all this, he still delayed and hesitated, although he had changed his mind. Octavian, however, actually believing that the reconciliation between them was in good faith, went every day to Antonius’ house, as was quite proper, since Antonius was consul and an older man and a friend of his father’s; and he paid him every other respect according to his promise until Antonius did him a second wrong in the following manner: Having acquired the province of Gaul in exchange for Macedonia,[157] he transferred the troops which were in the latter place to Italy, and when they arrived[Pg 60] he left Rome and went down as far as Brundisium to meet them.[158] Then, thinking that he had a suitable opportunity for what he had in mind, he spread a report that he was being plotted against, and seizing some soldiers, he threw them into chains, on the pretext that they had been sent for this very purpose of killing him. He hinted at Octavian but did not definitely name him. The report quickly ran through the city that the consul had been plotted against, but had seized the men who had come to attack him. Then his friends gathered at his house, and soldiers under arms were summoned. In the late afternoon the report reached Octavian also that Antonius had been in danger of being assassinated, and that he was sending for troops to guard him that night. Immediately Octavian sent word to him that he was ready to stand beside his bed with his own retinue to keep him safe, for he thought that the plot had been laid by some of the party of Brutus and Cassius. He was thus in readiness to do an act of kindness entirely unsuspicious of the rumor Antonius had started or of the plot. Antonius, however, did not even permit the messenger to be received indoors, but dismissed him discourteously. The messenger[Pg 61] returned after hearing fuller reports and announced to Octavian that his name was being mentioned among the men about Antonius’ door as being himself the man who had despatched the assassins against Antonius, who now were in prison. Octavian when he heard this at first did not believe it because of its improbable sound, but soon he perceived that the whole plan had been directed against himself, so he considered with his friends as to what he should do. Philippus and Atia[159] his mother came also, at loss over the strange turn of affairs, and desiring to know what the report meant and what were Antonius’ intentions. They advised Octavian to withdraw from the city at once for a few days until the matter could be investigated and cleared up. He, unconscious of any guilt, thought that it would be a serious matter for him to conceal himself and in a way incriminate himself, for he would gain nothing toward his safety by withdrawing, while he might the more easily be destroyed in secret if he were away from home. Such was the discussion in which he was then engaged.

On the following morning he sat as usual with his friends and gave orders that the doors be opened to those of his townsmen, guests, and soldiers who[Pg 62] were accustomed to visit him and greet him, and he conversed with them all in his usual way, in no wise changing his daily routine. But Antonius called an assembly of his friends and said in their presence that he was aware that Octavian had even earlier been plotting against him, and that when he was to leave the city to go to the army that had come for him, he had provided Octavian with this opportunity against him. That one of the men sent to accomplish the crime had, by means of substantial bribes, turned informer in the matter; and hence he had seized the others; and he had now called his friends together to hear their opinions as to what should be done in the light of the recent events. When Antonius had spoken the members of his council asked to be shown where the men were who had been seized, so that they might find out something from them. Then Antonius pretended that this had nothing to do with the present business, since, forsooth, it had already been confessed to; and he turned the discourse into other channels, watching eagerly for someone to propose that they ought to take vengeance on Octavian and not quietly submit. However, they all sat in silent thought, since no apparent proof[Pg 63] lay before them, until someone said that Antonius would do well to dismiss the assembly, saying that he ought to act moderately and not stir up any disturbance, for he was consul. After this discussion, Antonius dismissed the assembly. Two or three days afterward, he set out for Brundisium to take over the army which had now arrived there. There was no further discussion about the plot, and when he left, his friends who remained behind dismissed the whole matter, and no one ever saw any of the conspirators who were alleged to have been taken.[160]

31.Octavian, although now exonerated from the charge, was none the less chagrined at the talk about him, interpreting it as evidence of a great conspiracy against him. He thought that if Antonius had happened to get the army on his side by means of bribes he would not have delayed in attacking him, not because he had been wronged in any respect, but simply led on to that course as an outcome of his former hopes. It was manifest that a man who had concocted this charge would go further to others and that he would have been eager to do this from the first if he had not had to fear the army. Accordingly Octavian was filled with righteous indignation[Pg 64] against Antonius and with some concern for his own person, now that the other’s intention had become plain. Reviewing all contingencies, he saw that he must not remain quiet, for this was not safe, but that he must seek out some aid wherewith to oppose the other’s power and strategems. So then, reflecting upon this question, he decided that he had better take refuge in his father’s colonies, where his father had granted allotments and founded cities, to remind the people of Caesar’s beneficence and to bewail his fate and his own sufferings, and thus to secure their support, attracting them also by gifts of money. He thought that this would be his only safe course, that it would redound greatly to his fame, and that it would also redeem the prestige of his family. It was a far better and juster course than to be pushed aside out of his inherited honor by men who had no claim to it, and finally to be foully and nefariously slain just as his father had been. After consulting over this with his friends and after sacrificing, with good fortune, to the gods, that they might be his assistants in his just and glorious endeavor, he set out, taking with him a considerable sum of money, first[Pg 65] of all into Campania where were the Seventh and Eighth Legions (for that is what the Romans call their regiments). He thought that he ought first to sound the feelings of the Seventh, for its fame was greater, and with this colony aligned in his favor, and many others with it ...[161] and in this plan and in the events that followed, he had the approval of his friends. These were: Marcus Agrippa, Lucius Maecenas, Quintus Juventius, Marcus Modialius, and Lucius.[162] Other officers, centurions, and soldiers followed, as well as a multitude of slaves and a pack train carrying the pay-money and the supplies. As for his mother,[163] he decided not to acquaint her with his plan, lest, out of affection and weakness, like a woman and a mother, she might be a hindrance to his great purpose. He gave out openly that he was going to Campania to sell some of his father’s property there, to take the money and put it to the uses that his father had enjoined. But even so, he went off entirely without her consent.

At that time Marcus Brutus and Gaius Cassius were at Dicaearchia,[164] and when they learned of the throng that was accompanying Octavian from Rome[Pg 66] (the messengers having exaggerated the report, as usually happens) they were struck with much fear and consternation, thinking that the expedition was directed against themselves. They took to flight across the Adriatic. Brutus went to Achaea, Cassius to Syria. When Octavian arrived in Calatia in Campania, [165] the inhabitants received him as the son of their benefactor and treated him with the highest honor. On the following day he disclosed the whole situation to them and he appealed to the soldiers, telling them how unjustly his father had been killed and how he was himself being plotted against. As he spoke, some of the decurions did not wish to listen at all, but the people did so eagerly and with good will, and they sympathized with him, frequently bidding him to be of good cheer, for they would not neglect him but would assist him in every way until he should be established in his inherited rights. Then he invited them to his house and gave each of them five hundred drachmae; and the next day he called together the members of the curia and appealed to them not to be outdone in good will by the people, but to remember Caesar who had given them the colony and their position of honor. He promised that they would experience no less benefits at his own hands.[Pg 67] He showed that it was more fitting for him to enjoy their aid and to make use of their influence and arms than for Antonius to do so. They were aroused to a greater zeal to help him and to undertake trouble and danger with him if need be. Octavian commended their zeal and asked them to accompany him as far as the neighboring colonies, and furnish him safe-conduct. The people were pleased at this and gladly complied, escorting him under arms to the next colony.[166] And gathering these also into an assembly, he addressed them. He succeeded in persuading both legions to escort him to Rome through the other colonies to Rome and strenuously to repel any act of violence on the part of Antonius. He attracted other soldiers also with high pay, and on the march he trained and instructed the new recruits, sometimes individually and sometimes in squads, telling them that they were going against Antonius. He sent some of his followers who were preeminent for intelligence and daring to Brundisium,[167] to see if they could also win the forces just arrived from Macedonia over to his side, bidding them remember his father Caesar and not to betray his son. He instructed his propagandists that if they could not achieve their purpose in the[Pg 68] open, they were to write this out and scatter it all about so that the men could pick up the notices and read them;[168] and in order that they might join his party he made promises that filled the rest with hope of what they would receive from him when he came into his power. So they departed.

(End of the life of Augustus and of the narrative of Nicolaus of Damascus.)

[Pg 69]

1.[1] Σεβαστός, Augustus, must be understood. The word was doubtless given in the context immediately preceding the present opening sentence. The title was proposed by Plancus and was ratified by the senate on January 16, 27 B.C. (CIL 1² p. 307, Suet., Aug. 7, 2; Dio 53, 16, 6-8; 20, 1; Liv., Epit. 134; Vell. 2, 91, 1; Flor. 2, 34; Mon. Anc. 6, 16). Nicolaus attaches no significance of divinity to the title, though Suetonius and Dio do so. Verg., Ec. 1, 6; G. 1, 24-39, speaks of Octavian as divine, but no attribute of divinity is mentioned in the Aeneid with reference to Augustus.

[2] Nicolaus does not necessarily infer that an imperial cult existed at this period in Italy, and hence is not at variance with Suet., Aug. 52; Dio 51, 20, where it is stated that Augustus did not permit an imperial cult in Italy, although he allowed temples to be erected to ‘Rome and Augustus’ in the provinces. See also H. Heinen, Klio 11, pp. 139 ff.; W. S. Ferguson, Am. Hist. Rev., 18, pp. 243 ff. J. Asbach, Rh. Mus., 37, p. 297, is mistaken in reasoning that Augustus must have died before any worship could have taken place. L. R. Taylor, Trans. Am. Philol. Ass., 51, p. 124 suggests that whatever savored of an imperial cult in Italy from 30 B.C. on, was in fact simply a cult of the genius of the emperor (Dio 51, 19, [Pg 70] 7; Ov., Fast. 2, 637; Hor., Od. 4, 5, 31-35).

[3] Drusus’ expedition of 11 B.C. is probably alluded to (Vell., 2, 97, 2-3; Suet., Aug., 21; Dio 35, 2, 4; Tac., Ann., 2, 26, 12, 39). There is a noteworthy consonance between the phrase of Nicolaus, ‘nor had they been subject within the memory of any one’ and Mon. Anc., 5, 44, ‘Pannoniorum gentes quas ante me principem populi Romani exercitus nunquam adiit.’ This may be due to the use by Nicolaus of Augustus’ memoirs.

[4]Adriatic.

[5] Tiberius succeeded Agrippa as leader of expeditions against the Pannonians (Mon. Anc., 30; Dio 54, 36, 2-3).

[6] A remark of the excerptor is enclosed within the parentheses.

2.[7] Nicolaus employs the method of a Peripatetic in presenting the order of events in the life of an individual. (Leo, die Griech. Röm. Biogr., p. 190).

[8] His family was from Velitrae (Suet., Aug., 1, 94; Dio 45, 1, 1). C. Octavius the father was praetor (Cic., Q. frat. 1, 1, 7) and proconsul for Macedonia (Suet., Aug., 3; CIL 6, 1311) and was only prevented by death from attaining the consulship. (Cic., Phil., 3, 6, 15).

[9] C. Octavius is characterized as rich by Velleius (2, 59).

[10] C. Octavius died in 58 B.C. when his son was 4 years old (Suet., Aug., 8).

[11] One of those involved was C. Toranius, who had been [Pg 71] an aedile with the elder C. Octavius (CIL 6, 1311). He was in due time proscribed by Augustus, (App., 4, 12; Suet., Aug., 27) so that Octavius’ remission of his claims and apparent satisfaction with his remainder as expressed by Nicolaus did not prevent a subsequent day of reckoning.

3.[12] Nicolaus’ statement of Octavius’ age is not corroborated by Suetonius (Aug. 8) nor by Quintilian (12, 6, 1) who give Octavius’ age as 12 years when the oration was given. Perhaps separate occasions are referred to by Nicolaus and the other writers. If a closer agreement is to be desired, ἐννέα could be altered to ἕνδεκα (Müller). Suetonius identifies this occasion with the death of Octavius’ grandmother Julia, while Nicolaus does not expressly do so. His mention of Julia’s death in the following sentence, however, admits of the inference that the one occurrence suggested the other to his mind, and that there was therefore some connection between them.

[13] With a single exception the name Atia is written Antia throughout the excerpt. She was C. Octavius’ second wife (Plut., Ant. 31) and was from Aricia (Cic., Phil., 3, 6, 16; Suet., Aug., 4).

[14] Incorrect as the text stands. Valesius indicated that L. Marcius Philippus’ ancestor, Q. Marcius Philippus, was engaged not with Philip V of Macedonia but [Pg 72] with his son Perseus (CIL 1, p. 359). Either Nicolaus was misinformed, or Φίλιππον has been inserted in the text by attraction in place of Περσέα. Cicero (Att. 12, 9) calls L. Philippus ‘son of Amyntas’ jokingly. Amyntas was the father of the great Philip of Macedon.

Q. Philippus was actually in Macedonia during Philip’s lifetime according to Livy (39, 48; 40, 2-3). The passage in Nicolaus shows that the Marcii of Cicero’s day were descended from the noble Marcii active during the 2nd century B.C.

[15] Octavius’ youth was spent in Rome and the vicinity (Suet., Aug. 94).

[16] One of the instructors was one Epidius (Suet., Rhet. 4). For the question of his identification, see Schanz, Röm. Lit. Gesch., 1, p. 290.

4.[17] Beginning of 49 B.C.

[18] L. Philippus had a country place near Cicero’s at Astura (Cic., Att., 12, 16; 12, 18, 1).

[19] On October 18, 48 B.C. (CIL 10, 8375; Dessau, Ins. Lat. Sel., 108) since Octavius was born on September 23, 63 B.C., he was about 15 years old. Suetonius is correct in Aug. 8 where he speaks of Octavius as in his twelfth year, that is 11 years of age, and places the assumption of the toga virilis 4 years later.

[20] L. Domitius Ahenobarbus was killed at Pharsalus (Cic., [Pg 73] Phil., 2, 71; Caes., B. C., 3, 99; Suet., Nero, 2). Culex 26 and 27, ‘Octavi venerande’ and ‘sancte puer’ show that this was addressed to Octavius after his election to the office of pontifex; see Class. Philol. 15, p. 26.

[21] The election of Octavius was, of course, at the request of Julius Caesar.

[22] That of pontifex (Cic., Phil., 5, 17; Vell., 2, 59).

[23] Valesius took this to be a reference to a custom prevalent in Rome in Cicero’s time. Foppish young men and even senators were to be seen arrayed not in the ordinary Roman, but in Eastern garb. See Cic., pro Rab. Post., 10, 27, where, however, there is a slight corruption of the text.

5.[24] In the autumn of 47, if both consuls were present as Nicolaus says. The Feriae Latinae were inaugurated in 49 (CIL 1, p. 440, Fasti Cos. Capitolini). The following year, 48, Caesar was absent in the East, as was also the case in 46 and 45. In 45 ‘a certain prefect’ conducted the Feriae (Dio 43, 48) for Caesar was then sole consul; in 48 and 46 the other consul was probably in charge. For 48 this was Servilius Isauricus and for 46, Lepidus.

[25] As praefectus urbi. Nicolaus is correct and the other authors are wrong. App., 3, 9; Dio 43, 51; Plin., N. H., 7, 147 say that Octavius became magister equitum in this year. Gardthausen, Aug. und seine Zeit, p. 48, [Pg 74] shows that there is a possibility for confusion between the terms praefectus urbi and magister equitum in the writings of the later Greek historians. The latter office would be considerably too responsible for a youth of 16 years, while it is conceivable that the duties of praefectus urbi, at least during the period of the Feriae when the city was almost entirely deserted, would not be excessively onerous. Strabo 5, C. 229 and Dio 49, 42 show that the practice of appointing youths for this office was continued by Augustus.

[26] The proper duty of the praefectus urbi (CIL 2, 3387).

6.[27] He started for Spain in April, 49 B.C. (Cic., Att. 10, 3a) and in due time brought about the surrender of Afranius (Caes., B. C., 1, 37-87; App. 2, 42; Dio 41, 22; Suet., Caes. 34; 75).

[28] Pharsalus, August 9 (= June 7 corrected calendar) 48 B.C. (Caes., B. C., 3, 75-99; App. 2, 64-82; Dio 41, 51-63; CIL 1² p. 324).

[29] Referring to the Bellum Alexandrinum. In point of fact, Caesar left Egypt nominally free to be ruled by Cleopatra.

[30] The Black Sea. The reference is to the battle at Zela with Pharnaces, son of Mithradates, whom he overcame on August 2/May 21, 47 B.C. (CIL 1² p. 244). This was the occasion of the celebrated ‘veni vidi vici.’

[31] [Pg 75] Caesar embarked at Lilybaeum on December 25, 47 B.C. (Caes., B. Af., 2).

7.[32] Caesar arrived July 29, 46 B.C. (Caes., B. Af. 98). The decisive battle was Thapsus, April 6, reported in Rome about April 20 (Cic., Fam. 9, 2).

[33] It was Caesar’s practice to put to death any who fell captive to him a second time (Dio 41, 62; 43, 17; 44, 45; 44, 46; Suet., Caes., 75). In describing the incident which follows, however, Nicolaus seems to have exaggerated the importance of Octavius’ exploit, for in every case of similar circumstances Caesar allowed each of his subordinates to secure the release of one prisoner. Dio 43, 12-13 says further that Caesar released Cato’s son and ‘most of the rest.’ Nicolaus evidently drew from Augustus’ personal memoirs of his youth for this portion of the biography, and found it advantageous to emphasize Octavius’ act at this juncture. For a contemporary commentary, see Cic., Fam. 6, 13, 3, where Caesar is said to be especially incensed at those involved in the African disturbance, but that with the lapse of time he seems to have become more indulgent toward them.

[34] This is the first indication that Agrippa was already a companion of Octavius. See Sen., Epis., 15, 2, 46.

8.[35] Caesar had 4 triumphs: for Gaul, Egypt, Pontus, and Africa (Liv., Epit., 115; App., 2, 101; Dio 43, 19).

[36] [Pg 76] Octavius was, through his mother, grandson of Caesar’s sister Julia. Suetonius (Caes. 83, 1) is explicit in stating that Caesar’s will whereby Octavius was adopted as Caesar’s son, was made on September 13, 45 B.C. Nicolaus has here either anticipated this accepted date by something more than a year, or else he had access to a statement in Augustus’ memoirs to the effect that Octavius knew of the existence of an earlier will in which he had been made Caesar’s adopted son.

[37] Nicolaus is probably referring to the ‘cognomen imperatoris’ and not to the ‘praenomen imperatoris.’ According to Dio 43, 44, the ‘praenomen imperatoris’ was not conferred upon Caesar until after the battle of Munda, some seven months later. However, if Nicolaus felt any unusual significance in the title Imperator as here mentioned, we have an indication that Caesar actually held the new title prior to the date given by Dio. Suetonius (Caes. 76) including ‘praenomen imperatoris’ in a group of various honors conferred upon Caesar, gives no date or correlative occurrence in this connection. See McFayden, The History of the Title Imperator under the Roman Empire, Chicago 1920, pp. 7 ff.

9.[38] The plays and games (Cic., Fam. 12, 18, 2; Livy, Epit., 115; Dio 43, 22-24; App. 2, 102; Plut., Caes., 55; Suet., Aug., 39; Vell. 2, 56) were given immediately after Caesar’s [Pg 77] dedication of the temple to Venus Genetrix on September 26, (= July 20 corrected calendar) 46 B.C. Augustus continued these games annually as the ‘ludi Victoriae Caesaris’ on July 25. Vergil seems to have them in mind in writing Aeneid 5 and Catalepton 14, see Class. Quart. 14, p. 156. The ludi Romani and ludi Graeci were given separately (Suet., Aug. 45; Tac., Annal. 14, 15). See also CIL 6, 32323; Dessau, Ins. Lat., 5050, an account of the Ludi Saeculares of 17 B.C. In addition to the Theatre of Pompey, a temporary wooden stage was erected for the ludi Latini in 46 B.C. as in 17 B.C. (line 154 of the inscription).

[39] The effects of the sunstroke were, however, apparently lasting throughout Octavius’ life. He was unable to withstand the Italian sun even in winter, and never went out into the open without a hat (Suet., Aug., 82).

10.[40] To Spain. He started apparently in November of 46 B.C. He was still in Rome on September 24 (Cic., Fam., 6, 14, 2). Nearly a month was consumed in his journey thither (Strabo 3, 4, 9; App. 2, 103; Suet., Caes., 56).

[41] Sextus Pompeius had 11 legions in all. Caesar had sent to Cicero in January, 45 B.C., a copy of a letter which he had received from L. Vibius Paciaecus, one of his subordinates in Spain who was in a position to [Pg 78] know, and who gave this figure (Cic., Fam., 6, 18, 2).

[42] Seven months had not elapsed between Caesar’s departure from Rome and the battle of Munda (March 17, 45 B.C.).

11.[43] Carteia, on the Bay of Gibraltar. Octavius must have arrived after the battle of Munda had taken place, otherwise Nicolaus certainly would have mentioned his presence at that encounter, Caesar’s last successful one. Caesar wrote to Cicero from Hispalis, his next stopping point (Caes., B. Hisp., 39) on April 30 (Cic., Att., 13, 20, 1). Octavius’ arrival at Carteia was therefore some time in May.

[44] σύνεσιν. There seems to be no valid reason for altering the text, with Müller, to σύντασιν, ‘exertions’.

12.[45] Lacuna of 2 pages. The information embodied in chapters 10-12 is unique with Nicolaus and hence does not permit of any basis for comparison with other writers. Suet., Aug., 8 makes the brief statement that Octavian proceeded to Spain to join his great-uncle after recovering from his illness; Vell. 2, 59, 3 briefly notes that Octavius was with Caesar, and Dio 43, 41, in alluding to the prodigy of the sprouting palm, seems to infer that Octavius was present during the entire expedition, including Munda. This portion [Pg 79] of Nicolaus’ biography shows every indication of having been compiled with much dependence upon Augustus’ memoirs. It is possible that Nicolaus enlarged upon the importance of Octavius’ actions in these chapters over and above the material which he found in Augustus’ memoirs; however, the tone of the Monumentum Ancyranum shows that false modesty, at least, was not over-evident in the character of the autobiographer in that case, and it is conceivable therefore that Nicolaus has repeated Augustus’ words much as he found them.

13.[46] ἀρ]γυροῦ is Müller’s restoration. The reference, if this restoration is correct, apparently is to a silver table-service. Dindorf attempts no restoration, but prints simply γύρου—‘of a circle’.

[47] C. Claudius Marcellus, consul in 50 B.C., and at that time a vigorous opponent of Julius Caesar (Cic., Brut., 64, 229; Plin., N. H., 2, 147; Suet., Caes., 29; App. 2, 26; Dio 40, 44; Pauly-Wissowa, Claudius, 216). He and the members of his immediate family were warmly congratulated by Cicero at the time of his attainment of the office of consul (Cic., Fam., 15, 7; 15, 8; 15, 9; 15, 10; 15, 11), and Cicero later mentioned him as being in accord, apparently at least, with his own views (Cic., Att., 10, 12, 3).

[Pg 80] When the civil war broke out he remained in Italy, coming to terms with Caesar. After Caesar’s death he gave his support to his young brother-in-law Octavian. The family can be traced back 8 generations to M. Claudius Marcellus, consul in 331 B.C.

[48] Drawn, as has been noted (chap. 8, note 36) on September 13, 45 B.C. This passage proves that Nicolaus knew the facts about the will and that the statement in chap. 8 is at least careless.

[49] The statement as to the proportion of Octavius’ inheritance agrees with Suet., Caes., 83, but is at variance with Liv., Epit., 116, where one half of the total is assigned to Octavius. Q. Pedius and L. Pinarius were the other beneficiaries (Suet., Caes., 83, 2; App. 3, 22; 23; 94; Plin., N. H., 35, 21).

14.[50] Pseudo-Marius, otherwise Herophilus or Amatius, was a well-known character (Cic., Att., 12, 49, 1; 14, 6, 1; Phil. 1, 2, 5; App. 3, 2). After Caesar’s death he erected an altar or column on the place where Caesar’s body had been burned and was responsible for much rioting there. Antony finally put him to death, to the relief of Cicero (Cic., Att., 14, 7, 1; 14, 8, 1; App. 3, 3); see also Val. Max. 9, 15, 1; Liv., Epit., 116.

[51] Caesar’s aunt, Julia, who died in 68 B.C., was the wife of the great C. Marius (Plut., Caes., 1, 1).

15.[52][Pg 81] Caesar, not the senate, declared Octavius a patrician. L. Cassius, tribune in 44 B.C. (Cic., Phil., 3, 23), introduced a special decree whereby the senate granted Caesar the power of declaring persons of his choice to be patricians (Tac., Ann., 11, 25; Suet., Caes., 41; Dio 43, 47, 3). One of those chosen thus was Octavius (Suet., Aug., 2; Dio 45, 2, 7); see E. Meyer, Caesars Monarchie, etc. Stuttgart 1919, p. 464.

[53] Excerptor’s note.

16.[54] Apollonia. According to Nicolaus, Octavius left Rome in December, and was therefore in Apollonia for 3 months before the murder of Caesar. This is at variance with App. 3, 9, where Octavius is said to have been in Apollonia for 6 months. In the latter case he would have had to leave Rome immediately after his return from Spain, which is not very probable in view of the plausible details given by Nicolaus in the preceding chapter.

The use of the word ἐνταυθοῖ (Müller), ἐνταῦθα (Dindorf) with reference to Apollonia, gives the impression that Nicolaus wrote the ‘Life of Augustus’ at that place. Chapters 16 and 17 are written with considerable detail concerning the behavior of the inhabitants just prior to Octavius’ departure, and the account is, among the historians, unique with Nicolaus. The [Pg 82] city was one of importance (Cic., Phil., 11, 11, 26), and a favorite stopping point for travellers between Asia and Rome via Brundisium. See O. E. Schmidt, Jahrb. für Class. Philol. Sup. 13, p. 685.

[55] Octavius was accompanied to Apollonia by his friends M. Agrippa and Q. Salvidienus Rufus (Suet., Aug., 94; Vell. 2, 59, 5). His instructor in rhetoric was the famous Apollodorus of Pergamum (Suet., Aug., 89; Strabo 13, 4, 3; Quint. 3, 1, 17). Caesar sent his nephew to Apollonia to be trained in military tactics in anticipation of an expedition against the Parthians (Suet., Aug., 8; App. 3, 9; Dio 45, 3; Plut., Brut., 22; Cic., 43; Ant. 16; Vell. 2, 59, 4; Liv., Epit., 117).

[56] Codex, Αἰμίλιος. Müller has suggested that M. Aemilius Scaurus is the individual here referred to. He was, however, banished by Pompey in 52 B.C. (App., 2, 24; Cic., Off., 1, 38; Q. Fr., 3, 8, 4), and little is known of his subsequent actions. His son, of the same name, was with Antony at Actium (Dio 51, 2; 56, 38). The only other contemporaneous Aemilii were L. Aemilius Paullus and his son L. Aemilius Lepidus Paullus. The former was in Rome in April, 44 B.C. (Cic., Att., 14, 7, 1; 14, 8, 1) thus precluding a command in Macedonia; the latter accompanied Octavian against Sextus Pompeius in Sicily, 42-36 B.C. (Suet., Aug., 16). E. Schwartz, [Pg 83] Hermes 33, p. 182, would emend Μάρκος Αἰμίλιος to Μάνιος Ἀκίλιος on the basis of Cic., Fam., 7, 30, 3, ‘Acilius, qui in Graeciam cum legionibus missus est.’ The date of the letter is January, 44 B.C. It is to be noted that Cicero gives no praenomen in the letter; elsewhere, the MS readings are divided between ‘Manius’ and ‘Marcus’ (Caes., B. C., 3, 15; 3, 16; 3, 39; Dio 42, 12). Inasmuch as Nicolaus has written the praenomen ‘Marcus’ without abbreviation, an alteration to ‘Manius’ is scarcely justifiable in view of the other MS tradition. Marcus Acilius Caninus is the proper designation. See Klebs, P. W. Real-Encycl., 1, p. 251, Acilius 15. He was a ‘legatus’ of Caesar and was at Oricum in 48 B.C. (Caes., B. C., loc. cit.). See also App. 3, 10.

17.[57] Ἀλέξανδρος is the reading of the codex, and is retained in the editions of Müller and Dindorf. No associate of Octavius bearing this name is elsewhere mentioned, and since the statement is here made that he returned to his home at Pergamum, Müller suggests that Apollodorus is here intended to be represented. See note 55, chap. 16 with appended references. Piccolos has altered the reading to Ἀπολλόδωρος (see his note, Nicolas de Damas, Vie de César, Paris 1850, p. 85). It is possible that Nicolaus, through the use of Augustus’ memoirs, actually came upon some such name [Pg 84] as Alexander; if not, the reading ‘Alexander’ is attributable to an error of the excerptor. Apollodorus is described as being old at the time of the trip to Apollonia by Suet., Aug., 89.

[58] Four years earlier Caesar had been amicably received by the inhabitants of Apollonia. Hence the appropriate application of the term ‘friendly city’ even though their action had been possibly influenced as much by expediency as by conviction in 48 B.C. (Caes., B. C., 3, 10-13; App. 2, 54-55; Dio 41, 45, 1; 41, 47, 1).

[59] Strabo 7, C. 316, πόλις εὐνομωτάτη as applied to Apollonia, is reminiscent of Nicolaus’ expression, εὐδαίμονα τὴν πόλιν ἐν τοῖς μάλιστα ποιήσας.

[60] Nicolaus gives a more detailed account of Octavius’ landing in Italy than do the other historians (App. 3, 10; Dio 45, 3; Vell. 2, 50). Beside Nicolaus only Appian mentions the fact that Octavius stopped first at Lupiae before proceeding to Brundisium.

[61] See note 49, chapter 13, and the citations there appended. Pedius and Pinarius are the only co-inheritors with Octavian according to Suet., Caes., 83, 2. Dio 44, 35 gives 30 and 75 denarii as alternative sums, to be paid each citizen according to the terms of the will. App. 3, 23 states that the shares of Pedius and Pinarius were requisitioned by Octavian to help make good the [Pg 85] amount to be distributed to the people. ‘Drachma’ and ‘denarius’ are to be understood as synonymous in the accounts of Dio and Nicolaus, though not properly identical in value.

[62] Senate was convened in the temple of Tellus on March 17, two days after the assassination, on the day of the Liberalia (Cic., Att., 14, 10, 1; 14, 14, 2; App. 2, 126; Dio 44, 22). Plut., Brut., 19 erroneously places the meeting of the senate on March 16.

[63] Caesar named Lepidus ‘Magister equitum iterum’ for the year 44 (CIL 1, p. 440; 466; Dio 43, 49, 1; Suet., Caes., 82; Plin., N. H., 7, 147).

[64] CIL 1² p. 63, 64; Dio 43, 49; 45, 9; Cic., Phil., 2, 70; App. 2, 107; Cic., Fam., 11, 2, 1; Plut., Ant., 11; Brut. 18; Caes. 61; Vell. 2, 56; 58; Liv., Epit., 116, 117.

[65] Probably a parenthesis by Nicolaus, and not a part of the report that Octavius heard at the time. Brutus and Cassius apparently did not leave Rome at once.

18.[66] See App., 3, 11.

[67] L. Philippus, as late as the middle of the ensuing June, was still not at all sanguine of Octavius’ prospects, but thought that nothing ought to be entrusted to him, after having taken due regard for his age, his name, his inheritance, and his training (Cic., Att., 15, 12, 2). With respect to the advice of Philippus against [Pg 86] the assumption by Octavius of the name Caesar, see Cicero’s comment, on April 22 (Att. 14, 12, 2): ‘Octavius, quem quidem sui Caesarem salutabant, Philippus non, itaque ne nos quidem.’ See also Suet., Aug. 8; App. 3, 11; Vell. 2, 60, 1.

[68] ‘The state’ at this stage of events was, of course, by no means unreservedly ‘on his side’, as Nicolaus says. In point of fact, as we learn from Cicero’s letters, very few men at Rome concerned themselves at this time about Octavian because of his youth, Nicolaus is valuable here because he draws upon Octavian’s memoirs and reveals how early Octavian matured his plans to become Caesar’s successor in power as well as property. The attitude of the consul Antony is well known (see Suet., Aug., 10; Plut., Ant. 16). Octavian felt that the influence of Cicero was worth cultivating, and hence while staying with his step-father at the villa adjacent to that of Cicero at Puteoli, during the latter part of April, made the most of every opportunity to ingratiate himself with Cicero: ‘nobiscum hic perhonorifice et peramice Octavius;’ ‘Octavius ... mihi totus deditus.’ (Cic., Att., 14, 11, 2; 14, 12, 2). Before the middle of May, the tribune L. Antonius presented Octavius to the people as Caesar’s heir (Cic., Att., 14, 20, 5; 14, 21, 4; 15, 2, 3).

[69] [Pg 87] See App. 3, 10; 13; 14; Suet., Aug., 8; Vell. 2, 60, 1.

[70] ‘The name’ assumed by Octavius was not C. Julius Caesar Octavianus as one would expect but C. Julius C. f. Caesar (App. 3, 11; Dio 45, 3). Only his immediate following, however, called him Caesar; Cicero at this time called him Octavianus (Cic., Att. 14, 12, 2; 15, 12, 2; Fam. 16, 24, 2). In the decrees of the senate reported in Cicero’s Philippics during the next year he is referred to as C. Caesar C.f. pontifex (Cic., Phil., 5, 17); this was after he had had his adoption legally ratified by a ‘lex curiata’ (App. 3, 94). He had been striving toward this end for some time, but had continually been prevented in his attempts by Antony, who had, of course, always acted under the cover of a subordinate official (Dio 45, 5, 3; 46, 47, 4).

[71] For the ‘money and means’ to which Octavian had access see App. 3, 11; Dio 45, 3, who refer rather briefly to the matter.

[72] By ‘public property’ is meant the provincial tribute which apparently went into the Aerarium Saturni. Caesar treated military funds that accrued from booty as ‘his own’, and Octavian apparently appropriated a part of this.

[73] Octavian proceeded into Campania, where many of Caesar’s veterans had settled between 59 and 49 B.C. [Pg 88] (M. Cary, Jour. Phil. 70, p. 174 ff.), in order to discover what their probable disposition toward himself would be (App. 3, 12). This was as early as April, 44 B.C., for on the 18th, Cicero, at Cumae, met one who had on the same day encountered Octavian at Naples (Cic., Att., 14, 10, 3). As Nicolaus remarks below, the opportunity for levying an army did not seem to be at hand; nevertheless Octavian felt that preliminary investigations along these lines would not be out of place.

[74] A slight lacuna in the text exists at this point; the context is not seriously affected, however. The rendering of Müller has been reproduced here; Piccolos and Dindorf attempt no restoration.

[75] See the latter part of note 70, above.

[76] Octavian approached Rome before April 10. His advent excited the interest of Cicero, who inquired of Atticus how great a following he was gathering and what new moves he was contemplating (Cic., Att. 14, 5, 3). The reply of Atticus may have been of a disparaging nature toward Octavian; at any rate, Cicero again wrote on April 12, disdainfully dismissing Octavian from his thoughts ‘nam de Octavio, susque deque.’ Even this early, however, there were rumors in Rome that the legions in Macedonia were returning at [Pg 89] Octavian’s call: ‘Odiosa illa enim fuerant, legiones venire!’ (Cic., Att., 14, 6, 1). See also App. 3, 11; Dio 45, 3. On April 20, Cicero saw Octavian at Puteoli, for Octavian had, after his canvass of Campania, proceeded to his step-father’s villa at Puteoli, adjoining the property of Cicero (Cic., Att., 14, 11, 2). Shortly afterward, Octavian again went to Rome, stopping on the way at Tarracina (App. 3, 12; Gardthausen, Augustus, p. 53).

19.[77] According to Plutarch, Brut. 10, the conspiracy was well under way before March 1, 44 B.C.

[78] Suetonius, Caes. 80, gives the number of conspirators as 60; Eutropius, Brev. 6, 25, speaks of ‘60 or more.’ Of the total number, some 20 can be definitely identified by name; seven additional names have been erroneously included among the number by various authors. The 20 fall into three divisions: Caesarians, 6; Pompeians, 10; and those of uncertain partisanship, 4 (see Klotz, P. W. Real-Encycl. 10, p. 255).

[79] Nicolaus’ contradiction is self-evident. Just after saying that D. Brutus was a particular friend of Caesar, he includes him with Cassius and M. Brutus as a former member of the Pompeian faction. D. Brutus had, in fact, been associated with Caesar at least since 56 B.C.: ‘D. Brutum adulescentem classi Gallicisque navibus ... [Caesar] praeficit’ [Pg 90] (Caes., B. G., 3, 11, 5). Again, in 52 B.C. Caesar placed him in charge of some of his land forces during his engagement with Vercingetorix: ‘Brutum adulescentem his copiis praeficit;’ ‘mittit primum Brutum adulescentem cum cohortibus’ (Caes., B. G., 7, 9, 1; 7, 87, 1; B. C., 1; 36, 56, 58; 2, 3-7). When Caesar’s will was read, it was found that D. Brutus had been conditionally adopted by Caesar, subject to the death of Octavian (App. 2, 143).

Cassius was in command of Pompey’s sea-force in the Hellespont at the time of the civil war. He there surrendered to Caesar, though his capitulation seems not to have been justified by the circumstances (App. 2, 88; Dio 42, 6; Suet., Caes., 63). Caesar subsequently made him ‘legatus’ (Cic., Fam., 6, 6, 10; 15, 15, 2).

M. Brutus joined Pompey in Macedonia before Pharsalia (Plut., Brut. 4; Aurel. Vic., Vir. Illus. 82, 5). After the battle he went over to Caesar. Appian, 2, 146, makes the following statement: ‘all the murderers, except Decimus alone, had been taken prisoners from Pompey’s faction.’ The inaccuracy is similar to that of Nicolaus.

[80] The emendation of Müller, καίπερ Καίσαρος has been followed here; that of Piccolos is also good. The codex reading is unintelligible and that of Dindorf [Pg 91] is scarcely less so. He alters ἑκάστου to ἕκαστον, but leaves the remainder intact.

[81] The leniency of Caesar was, of course, not entirely attributable to altruistic motives, although from the tone of Nicolaus one might infer that such was the case. Caesar explains his policy in Cic., Att., 9, 7c.

[82] The claim of Brutus, that he was descended from Brutus the first consul and Ahala the regicide, was generally accepted as a fact both by historians and contemporary writers (Cic., Att., 13, 40, 1, ‘φιλοτέχνημα illud tuum, quod vidi in Parthenone, Ahalam et Brutum,’ see Tyrrell and Purser, The Correspondence of Cicero, vol. 5, p. 177, note 1; vol. 6, p. cv; App. 2, 112; Dio 44, 12; Plut., Brut. 1; Suet., Caes., 80).

[83] Cassius and Brutus are, of course, the outstanding examples of the type here referred to. For Caesar’s treatment of his former opponents, see Plut., Caes. 57, and citations in note 79, above.

[84] The allusion is perhaps to the enthronement of a statue of Caesar in the temple of Quirinus. Cicero expressed much indignation in referring to the matter (Cic., Att., 12, 45, 2; 13, 28, 3; Phil. 2, 43, 110; see also Dio 43, 45; Suet., Caes., 76). Caesar was hailed further as ‘Iuppiter Iulius’ and a temple was erected jointly to him and to ‘Clementia’ (App. 2, 106; Dio 44, 6; Plut., [Pg 92] Caes., 57; less specific, Suet., Caes., 76; Flor. 2, 13, 91).

[85] The conspirators were pledged among themselves without the usual formalities of either oaths or sacrifices, according to Appian, 2, 114, and Plutarch, Brut. 12. Sacrifices were the proper complement of oaths, but the attention which would have been drawn by their performance would have been at once fatal to the projected undertaking.

[86] The same incident is reported by the following authors: Appian 2, 116; Dio 44, 18; Suetonius, Caes., 81; Plutarch, Caes., 65; Velleius 2, 57; Florus 4, 2, 94. It is a noteworthy fact that with the passage of time the statements with regard to this occurrence become more positive. Nicolaus employs indirect discourse, placing the responsibility on the writer used by him as a source; all the other authors mention the matter as an actual happening.

20.[87] On the occasion of the ‘ludi Victoriae Caesaris,’ held July 20-30, 45 B.C. as a continuation of the ‘ludi’ of Sept. 46 (old calendar) a figure of ‘Victoria’ was borne in procession in close proximity to an image of Caesar. The populace refrained from applause, the cause being, according to Cicero, that ‘Victoria’ was in bad company, through the presence of Caesar’s image (Cic., Att., 13, 44, 1).

[88][Pg 93] This is perhaps the most gratuitously extravagant statement in the entire fragment of Nicolaus. His purpose is, as E. Meyer suggests (Caesars Monarchie, p. 517) to place the blame for Caesar’s monarchical aspirations upon his associates, some of whom flattered him excessively while others deliberately urged him on with the intention of making him ultimately an object of general hatred. The same tone is exhibited by Dio, 44, 3, and Plutarch, Caes., 57. Caesar was entirely well aware that he was disliked, even by those whom he characterized as ‘easy going’: ‘Ego dubitem,’ Caesar is reported to have said, ‘quin summo in odio sim, quom M. Cicero sedeat nec suo commodo me convenire possit? Atqui si quisquam est facilis, hic est, tamen non dubito quin me male oderit’ (Cic., Att., 14, 1, 2). Again, ‘Ego nunc tam sim stultus ut hunc ipsum facilem hominem putem mihi esse amicum, cum tam diu sedens meum commodum exspectet?’ (Cic., Att., 14, 2, 3).

[89] The ‘senatus consultum,’ enacted after the victory at Munda, is also referred to by Dio 43, 45. It appears that Caesar permitted the elections by magistrates to proceed nominally as before, by popular vote, but that he was the actual determining factor as to who should be elected (Dio 43, 47). Compare Appian 4, 91, Cassius’ alleged speech to his soldiers.

[90][Pg 94] Concerning Caesarion, called ‘Cyrus’ by Nicolaus, the son of Caesar and Cleopatra, see Cic., Att., 14, 20, 2; Dio 47, 31; Suet., Caes., 52; Aug. 17; Plut., Caes., 49; Ant. 54. All but Nicolaus acknowledge that he really was Caesar’s son, and Nicolaus is unable to prove the falsity of the allegation. It would have been extremely difficult for Caesar to have secured the legitimizing of Caesarion because of the universal antipathy in Rome toward Cleopatra and eastern institutions in general; further, much as Caesar may have desired a natural heir, his purpose could not best be served by Caesarion, who was an infant when Caesar’s will was drawn, in comparison with his great-nephew, then 18 years of age.

[91] Mention of Caesar’s intention of establishing an empire in the East, with a capital at Alexandria or at Ilium is also made by Suetonius, Caes., 79. Both he and Nicolaus tend toward rejecting the idea as absurd; but the fact is significant that in the summer of 48 B.C. Caesar granted freedom to Ilium (Strabo 13, 1, 27). R. Meyer (Kleine Schr. p. 467; Caesars Monarchie p. 521) thinks the plan entirely logical, and accepts the report as plausible. It would have been far simpler for Caesar to retain and augment his pseudo-divine attributes in the East than could ever have [Pg 95] been the case in Rome; at the same time, the rights and privileges historically peculiar to Rome could have been served by an independent city government. The same question arose in Augustus’ time (Horace, Od., 3, 3).

[92] Compare Cicero’s remarks to Caesar concerning the statue on the rostra (Cic., pro Deiot. 12, 34). Dio 44, 4 gives a confused account of two statues having been erected on the rostra, one intended to represent Caesar as savior of the citizens, and the other as ‘rescuer of the city from siege;’ the appropriateness of this latter attribute seems somewhat obscure.

[93] The full names of the tribunes were L. Caesetius Flavus and C. Epidius Marullus (Suet., Caes., 79; Dio 44, 9).

[94] For the precedent of the temple of Concordia as a meeting place for the senate, see Cicero, Cat., 3, 21; Phil. 2, 8, 19; Sallust, Cat., 46; Plutarch, Cic., 19.

[95] The account of Nicolaus, involving banishment of the tribunes, is at variance with the versions of Appian, 2, 108; 4, 93; Dio 44, 10; 46, 9; Suetonius, Caes., 79; Plutarch, Caes., 61; Ant. 12; Livy, Epit., 116, all of whom concur in saying that the tribunes were merely cast out of the senate, and not sent into exile. It is shown by Cicero, Phil., 13, 15, 31, that the tribunes [Pg 96] were simply removed from office: ‘quid ergo, ut Marullum, ut Caesetium a republica removeremus, eum consecuti sumus?’ The term ‘a republica’ means ‘from public life’ and not ‘from the country;’ compare Velleius 2, 68.

[96] In a letter to Atticus (Cic., Att., 15, 44, 1) dated about July 20, 45 B.C., Cicero alludes to the reported proposal of Cotta that Caesar be made king in order that Parthia might be subdued according to the terms of the Sibylline prophecy which stated that Parthia would be proof against any but a king (Cic., Div., 2, 110). Compare also the passage, ‘munerum regiorum’ (regionum?) (Cic., Fam., 6, 19, 2; Tyrrell and Purser 5², p. 162 and note). On August 2, 45 B.C., Cicero actually speaks of Caesar as ‘the king:’ ‘nisi viderem scire regem me animi nihil habere’ (Cic., Att., 25, 37, 2). The episode of the diadem, involving the tribunes Caesetius and Marullus, seems to have occurred in January, 44 B.C. (Dio 44, 10: ‘later, when he was riding in from Albanum;’ CIL 1, p. 461: ‘C. Iulius C.f.C.n. Caesar VI dict. IIII ovans a. DCCIX ex monte Albano VII Kal. Febr.’).

21.[97] February 16 (CIL 1² p. 310, Commentarii diurni, ‘XV K. Mart. Luper’). See also Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Römer,² p. 209.

[98] Mention of Licinius as being the first to present [Pg 97] to Caesar the diadem enclosed within a wreath is unique with Nicolaus. Appian 2, 109; Dio 44, 11; Livy, Epit., 116; Velleius 2, 56, 4; Plutarch, Caes., 60; Ant. 12, and Cicero, Phil., 2, 84-85; 3, 12, all concur in that they make Antony solely responsible for having offered the crown to Caesar. Duttlinger, Untersuchungen über den historischen Wert des βίος Καίσαρος, Heidelberg 1911, endeavoring to align the account of Nicolaus with Cicero’s words: ‘Unde diadema? non enim abjectum sustuleras, sed attuleras domo meditatum et cogitatum scelus’ (Cic., Phil., 2, 85) makes the following assertion: ‘Diese Worte zeigen mit unumstösslicher Sicherheit, dass Caesar schon einmal, bevor Antonius kam, das Diadem von sich gewiesen hatte.’ A saner view is expressed in the translation of the phrase by Halm-Laubmann, Ciceros Ausgewählte Reden, vol. 6, p. 110: ‘du konntest es nicht von der Strasse aufgehoben, auf der Strasse gefunden haben;’ thus no suggestion of a former attempt by Licinius is to be read into Cicero’s words. Cicero’s immediate purpose, of course, was to bring discredit upon Antony for his actions on that day of the Lupercalia, and hence any mention of Licinius on his part would have been irrelevant to his case. Cicero’s Philippics therefore afford no check upon the accuracy of Nicolaus’ account, which rests here upon [Pg 98] its merits of priority in comparison with the versions of the other historians.

[99] It seems that the behavior of Lepidus at this juncture was such as to attract attention; exactly what he did can not be ascertained, but the indications are that he kept himself strictly aloof. Cicero (Phil. 5, 38; 13, 17) wished to laud him, contrasting him with Antony. At the place of the former citation he says of him: ‘Semper ille populum Romanum liberum voluit maximumque signum illo die dedit voluntatis et iudicii sui, cum Antonio diadema Caesari imponente se avertit, gemituque et maestitia declaravit quantum haberet odium servitutis,’ etc. Cicero thus (though for a purpose) represents him as averse to autocracy, while Nicolaus suggests that he was in sympathy with Antony’s action.

[100] As tribune (Dio 44, 32).

[101] The report that Caesar was addressed directly by the crowd as king, ‘Χαῖρε βασιλεῦ’ = ‘salve rex,’ is given by Nicolaus alone. In this connection, however, see chap. 20, note 96, and especially Cic., Att., 13, 37, 2, where Cicero refers to Caesar as ‘rex’.

[102] In comparison with the motive of Antony given here, note the ridiculous reasons presented in the speech of Fufius Calenus as published by Dio (46, 17-19). There Antony is said to have offered the diadem for the very [Pg 99] purpose of shocking Caesar to reason and thus to cause him to reject the proffered crown.

22.[103] O. E. Schmidt, Jahrb. für Class. Philol. Sup. 13, p. 682 suggests that this section should follow immediately upon the words at the beginning of section 21: ‘τοιαῦτα μὲν δὴ τότε ἐλέγετο,’ thus making a more connected account of the accusation of the tribunes and their subsequent restitution. Since, however, Nicolaus is about to write of the annual elections, his order of relating these events is not unnatural.

Nicolaus declares that Cinna secured the recall of the tribunes through a decree passed while Caesar was yet alive; Appian 2, 122 alludes to the tribunes as still being in exile on March 16, 44 B.C., when Brutus and Cassius descended from the Capitoline and urged that they be recalled. E. Meyer, Caesars Monarchie, p. 527, n. 2, is inclined to favor the version of Nicolaus.

[104] The decree was that of the tribune L. Antonius, mentioned by Cicero (Phil. 7, 16). Suetonius, Caes., 41 and Dio 43, 51 refer to the legal right of Caesar to appoint one half of the total number of magistrates for 3 years in advance; at the expiration of this period his return from his expedition against the Parthians was to have been expected. The decree of Antonius was enacted between December 10, 45 B.C., [Pg 100] the day on which the newly elected tribunes entered into office, and March 15, 44 B.C. (see Sternkopf, Ciceros ausgewählte Reden, vol. 9, p. 33).

Appian, 2, 128; 2, 138, says that Caesar appointed magistrates for 5 years in advance; Suetonius, Caes., 76, speaks of ‘several’ years; Nicolaus is corroborated by Cicero (Att. 14, 6, 2), ‘Etiamne consules et tribunos pl. in biennium quos ille voluit.’ See also Cic., Fam., 10, 32, 2. Among the historians, Nicolaus alone names Pansa and Hirtius, Brutus and Plancus, but Cicero speaks of the former pair as ‘consules designati’ in Philippic 3, 37 and 39, and of the latter pair as ‘consules designati’ in Philippic 3, 38.

[105]Antony.

[106] For the behavior of Caesar when the senate approached him to confer its honors upon him, see Appian 2, 107; Dio 44, 8; Suetonius, Caes., 78; Plutarch, Caes., 60; Livy, Epit., 116; Eutropius 6, 25; Zonaras 10, 11. Appian and Plutarch speak of Caesar as seated on the rostra; Dio, Suetonius, and Livy place him before the temple of Venus Genetrix. In the interest of accuracy it is to be noted that both Appian and Plutarch incorrectly refer to ‘consuls’ in the plural as being at the head of the procession: ‘τῶν ὑπάτων ἡγουμένων’ and ‘προσιόντων δὲ τῶν ὑπάτων.’

[Pg 101]Excuses for Caesar’s failure to rise are offered by three of the historians: Dio lays the blame upon an attack of diarrhoea, Plutarch upon an attack of epilepsy, while Nicolaus, less extravagantly, simply says that Caesar did not at first see the throng because of his deep interest in his own undertaking. More plausible are the suggested reasons of Suetonius: that L. Cornelius Balbus dissuaded Caesar from rising (compare Plut., Caes., 60, end), or that C. Trebatius Testa urged him to rise and thus displeased him.

[107] Reading συνόντες with the codex. Piccolos reads συγγνόντες, and Dindorf συνέντες.

[108] See also Appian 2, 106, 134, 138; Dio 44, 4; 5, 50. After Caesar’s death Antony had inscribed upon a statue of Caesar which he placed on the rostra, ‘parenti optime merito’ (Cic., Fam., 12, 3, 1). Suetonius, Caes., 85 tells of the column erected in the forum, similarly inscribed, ‘parenti patriae.’

[109] See Appian 2, 107, 109; Dio 44, 7. Caesar’s motive in dismissing his guard was found to be difficult to explain by those who afterward sought for causes. To many it could not but seem almost suicidal negligence (Suet., Caes., 86); certainly his course did not meet with the favor of his more prudent adherents: ‘laudandum experientia consilium est Pansae atque Hirti, qui[Pg 102] semper praedixerant Caesari ut principatum armis quaesitum armis teneret’ (Vell. 2, 57, 1).

23.[110] As Pontifex Maximus, Caesar lived in the Regia, in the Via Sacra.

[111] The bridge has been identified by M. E. Deutsch, University of California Publications in Classical Philology, vol. 2, pp. 267 ff. ‘Petronia amnis est in Tiberim perfluens, quam magistratus auspicato transeunt cum in campo quid agere volunt’ (Festus 250). This stream, which flowed westward from the Quirinal, was accordingly bridged by a small wooden footway from which one might easily have been pushed into the shallow watercourse below. Suetonius also refers to a ‘pons’ but seems erroneously to have supposed it was the ‘pons’ of the voting place.

[112] The ‘Feriae Annae Perennae’ were celebrated on March 15 (CIL 1² p. 311; Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Römer,² pp. 147 and 241. See also Ovid, Fast., 3, 523; Macrobius, Sat., 1, 12, 6). Perhaps the reference is to the Quinquatrus of March 19 (Wissowa, op. cit., p. 144).

[113] Suetonius, Caes., 80, alone agrees with Nicolaus in recounting the four tentative plans discussed by the conspirators before it was decided that Caesar be killed in the senate on March 15, but he is far less explicit. According to Appian, 2, 115, Caesar was to [Pg 103] have set out for the East within four days of that date; hence the conspirators must have felt that there was no time to lose. The motions which Caesar wished to introduce at this session of the senate referred to final preparations and assignments before he departed for Parthia. Dio 44, 15, says that Brutus and Cassius felt that the motion might be put that Caesar be declared king in order to assure victory over the Parthians in accordance with a Sibylline prophecy (see chap. 20, note 96), and since they could not vote for the measure, from conviction, nor against it, from policy, they decided to kill him before suspicion should become directed against themselves. In this connection, see Appian 2, 113; Plutarch, Brut., 10, where attempts have been made to reproduce the supposed dialog between Brutus and Cassius on the subject.

24.[114] According to the Greek mode of orientation to the east, which Nicolaus has in mind, the back of one sacrificing would be kept toward the west. The Romans followed the Etruscan rule of facing south, in which case the west, being on the right, would not be an unfavorable quarter.

[115] The codex reading is ἐκέλευσε, obviously incorrect. Müller emends to ἐθέλησε; Piccolos and Dindorf to ἐπένευσε. It has been thought advisable to render[Pg 104] here as if ἐκέλευε were written, thus adhering more closely to the actual text. For the use of the imperfect to denote attempted action, compare Hdt. 1, 68, ‘ἐμισθοῦτο παρ’ οὐκ ἐκδιδόντος τὴν αὐλήν.’ (Godwin, G. M. T. 36).

[116] Literally, ‘he seemed to do something rather bold for one holding his hands inside.’ Didot renders as though Caesar were referred to as keeping his hands beneath his toga: ‘arrivé près de César, qui tenait ses mains sous sa toge.’ It is scarcely possible to derive such an interpretation from the Greek as it stands. The translation ‘for a suppliant’ was suggested by Plautus, Amph., 257, ‘velatis manibus orant, ignoscamus peccatum suom.’ There ‘veiled hands’ (bearing fillets) are a mark of supplication; ‘εἴσω τὰς χεῖρας ἔχοντος’ as applied to Cimber may have a similar meaning, particularly since he is described as feigning to intercede with Caesar for his brother; and Nicolaus may not have understood the Latin expression (compare App. 2, 117; Suet., Caes., 82; Plut., Caes. 66; Brut. 17).

[117] Appian 2, 117; Suet., Caes., 82; Livy, Epit., 116; Florus 2, 13, 95; Zonaras 10, 11 D; Eutropius 6, 25; Valerius Maximus 4, 5, 6; Plutarch, Caes., 66, mention 23 wounds; Dio 44, 19, speaks of ‘many’ wounds; Nicolaus [Pg 105] alone gives the number as 35. O. E. Schmidt, Jahrb. für class. Philol., sup. 13, p. 674, suggests that there may have been two traditions at the time of Nicolaus, one involving 23 wounds, the other 35. This belief is scarcely justifiable, since there is but one example of the latter tradition, and Suetonius, whose account usually coincides with that of Nicolaus, is here at variance. Piccolos, Nicolas de Damas, Vie de César, p. 89 shows how the capitals Κ and Γ (23) may have become corrupted to Ε and Λ (35). The error is possibly due to the excerptor.

25.[118] A slight lacuna exists here.

[119] Brutus, as spokesman for the assassins, is here described as attempting to deliver a formal address to the multitude immediately after the murder and before the conspirators fled to the Capitoline. A similar implication is found in Dio 44, 20-21, though Brutus is not there mentioned by name. Appian 2, 119, suggests rather that the slayers simply ran, shouting random remarks in defense of their deed.

[120] So also Appian 2, 114; Plutarch, Brut., 18, 2; Ant. 13, 2; Velleius 2, 58. Dio, 44, 19, says that the decision not to kill Antony was duly reached, but here Brutus is not named as being the influential factor. Cicero (Att., 15, 12, 2) seems to refer with some petulance to[Pg 106] the reputation for lenience which Brutus created for himself: ‘L. quidem Antonius liberaliter litteris sine cura me esse iubet. Habeo unum beneficium, alterum fortasse, si in Tusculanum venerit. O negotia non ferenda! quae feruntur tamen. τὰν δ’ αἰτίαν τῶν Βρούτων τις ἔχει.’ Again (Att. 15, 20, 2) ‘foedum ducens et quasi denuntiatum nobis ab Antonio ex hac nassa exire constitui ... haec omnis culpa Bruti.’ A year later Cicero again alludes to Brutus’ policy concerning Antony at the time of the murder of Caesar: ‘tu lenius’ (Cic., ad Brut., 2, 5, 1).

26.[121] It is not elsewhere mentioned that Caesar intended to make an expedition against the Indians.

[122] C. Calvisius Sabinus, consul in 39 B.C., was in the year 48 with Caesar (Caes., B. C., 3, 34). In 38 he held a command in Octavian’s fleet, at that time engaged with Sextus Pompeius (App. 5, 80-81), and in the year 36 he was superseded by Agrippa because of his failure to prevent the desertion of one of his subordinates (App. 5, 96). Marcius Censorinus, probably praetor in 43 B.C., is spoken of as a Caesarian and an Antonian in Att. 14, 10, 2; Phil. 11, 36; 13, 2, but their attempt to defend Caesar is mentioned only by Nicolaus.

[123] So also Appian 2, 118; Suetonius, Caes., 82.

26 b.[124] Compare Appian 2, 115; Dio 44, 16. The part played [Pg 107] by Decimus Brutus in engaging the services of the gladiators is referred to by Appian 2, 122; Plutarch, Brut. 12.

[125] As has been seen (chap. 22, note 109) there were, in fact, no guards. See also Appian 2, 118: ‘there was no detachment of soldiers about Caesar, for he did not care for guards.’

[126] A slight lacuna exists here.

[127] The second speech of Brutus was delivered in the afternoon of March 15. So also Plutarch, Brut., 18, 3-4. Plutarch, Caes., 67, 3 seems to imply that this same address took place on the following day: ‘μεθ’ ἡμέραν δὲ τῶν περὶ Βροῦτον κατελθόντων καὶ ποιησαμένων λόγους.’ Appian 2, 122 states that Brutus descended from the Capitoline, the wound in his hand still fresh, and, together with Cassius, spoke in the forum. The rather unexpected praise of Brutus may be an indication that Nicolaus is using Pollio’s histories.

27.[128] This is the ‘contio Capitolina prima’ which was held on March 15, late in the day, and at which Cicero was present. He endeavored to secure a convocation of the senate, to be summoned by Brutus and Cassius on their authority as praetors, so that they might be legally confirmed as tyrannicides, thus forestalling any attempt on the part of the Caesarians and the [Pg 108] Antonians to have them proclaimed murderers (Cic., Att. 14, 10, 1, ‘meministine me clamare illo ipso primo Capitolino die debere senatum in Capitolium a praetoribus vocari,’ etc. Also Cic., Phil., 2, 89). This meeting on the Capitoline should not be confused with a second ‘contio Capitolina’ referred to by Cicero (Att., 15, 1 b, 2), and which seems to have been subsequent to the meeting of the senate in the temple of Tellus on March 17, when Cicero was able to secure only a rather unsatisfactory compromise for the members of the republican faction. See the note of Tyrrell and Purser, The Correspondence of Cicero, vol. 5, p. 307.

[129] The temple of Jupiter Capitolinus is, of course, to be understood.

[130] The despatch of messengers from the conspirators to Antony and Lepidus is also told of by Appian 2, 123.

[131] Appian 2, 126 and Dio 44, 22 both make special note of the fact that Lepidus had an armed force in the city before daybreak on March 17. Appian, however, in the same passage asserts that Antony did not bring in any troops, so as not to disturb the city.

[132] Reading ἐκ νεωτερισμοῦ with E. Schwartz, Hermes 33, p. 184, instead of δὲ καὶ.

[133] Dio 44, 34, says that Lepidus was only making a pretense of advocating vengeance: ‘ὁ μὲν γὰρ Λέπιδος πρόσχημα τὴν τοῦ Καίσαρος τιμωρίαν ποιούμενος’[Pg 109], etc., while Appian 2, 151-152, states that Lepidus was employed as a tool both by those who desired revenge and those who favored amnesty with the assassins.

[134] ἄλλος, codex. E. Schwartz, Hermes 33, p. 184 suggests the emendation Βάλβος, which is very plausible.

[135] Between the sections 27 and 28 the excerptor has perhaps omitted a portion of his original material. Much of what is told by Nicolaus in section 27 is given in far greater detail than is the case with the other historians. The events related in this chapter, especially the interchange of messengers between Antony and Lepidus and Brutus and Cassius, have been thought to have had a very close connection with the circumstances which occasioned the writing of Cic., Fam., 11, 1, a letter from D. Brutus to M. Brutus and Cassius. O. E. Schmidt, Neue Jahrb. für Philol. und Paed., 129, wishes therefore to date the letter in the morning of March 17; P. Gröbe, Drumann-Gröbe Geschichte Roms, 1², p. 411 ff., would place the letter still earlier, on March 16. E. T. Merrill, Class. Philol. 10, p. 241 ff., has now shown that D. Brutus’ allusions to the disposition of Antony and Hirtius toward him may well have been relevant to a later period, and hence he would set the date of the letter as late as April 10, thus approximating Schmidt’s original view, which gave [Pg 110] April 5 as the probable time of writing (Die Correspondenz Ciceros in den Jahren 44 und 43, Marburg 1883). It follows therefore that chapter 27 of Nicolaus should not be employed as a criterion on the date of Cic., Fam., 11, 1.

28.[136] Lacuna, which is apparently quite long, for the affairs mentioned in the following belong to June and July, whereas the story of Octavian told before chapter 19 was only of his return to Rome in April.

[137] The aedile Critonius is probably referred to (compare App. 3, 28). The proper name may have been lost in the lacuna immediately above.

[138] Compare Appian 3, 28; Dio 45, 6; Suetonius, Caes., 88; Plutarch, Ant., 16; Pliny, N. H., 2, 23. Since both Appian and Nicolaus refer to two controversies between Octavian and Antony, of which the second was at the time of the festival of Venus Genetrix in July, the question has arisen as to what the earlier occasion could have been. The ‘ludi Cereales’ are precluded, for Octavian was in Campania during the period in which they were held, April 12-19 (Cic., Att., 14, 12, 2). The ‘ludi Florales’ were given April 28-May 3, and since Cicero on May 22 referred to the episode of the throne (Att. 15, 3, 2) these must have been the games at which Octavian experienced his difficulty for the first time, unless it[Pg 111] can be shown that the ‘ludi Cereales’ were postponed for a month, in which event they would have also been completed just prior to Cicero’s letter of May 22.

[139] See Appian 3, 21; 3, 23; Dio 45, 7. According to Appian’s account, Octavian liquidated not only the residuary estate which he received from Caesar, but also some of his own property in order to pay the specific legacies to the people. This would naturally make them feel indebted to him as well as to his late uncle, and was a particularly shrewd bit of strategy on his part in winning popular opinion away from Antony.

[140] Antony and Dolabella.

[141] Antony is accused of having made away with 700,000,000 sesterces (approximately $30,000,000) (Cic., Phil., 1, 17; 2, 35; 2, 93; 4, 14; 5, 11; Att. 14, 14, 5; Fam. 12, 2, 2; Vell. 2, 60, 4). Antony’s obvious defense was that the Caesarian treasury, the temple of Ops, had been left exhausted by Caesar (App. 3, 20).

[142] During April and May Antony was corresponding with Brutus and Cassius, both verbally and by letter. The general impression given by Cicero is that a friendly compromise was not improbable: ‘Antoni colloquium cum heroibus nostris pro re nata non incommodum.’ (Cic., Att., 14, 6, 1, written April 12) ‘Epistula brevis quae postea a te scripta est sane mihi fuit iucunda, de Bruti ad Antonium ... litteris[Pg 112]’ (Cic., Att., 14, 14, postscript). The appeal of Brutus and Cassius to Antony (Cic., Fam., 11, 2), as to what their chance for safety would be in Rome, was sent from Lanuvium toward the end of May.

[143] Lacuna.

[144] These men seem to belong to the ‘middle group’ just mentioned before the Lacuna. Nicolaus assumes that they are not genuine friends of Octavian but egg him on against Antony for purposes of their own. That they did so as Cicero certainly did for the sake of preserving the constitution he neglects to say. ‘Vibius’ is of course C. Vibius Pansa, one of the consuls designated for 43, who though formerly a friend of Antony was induced by Cicero to support the senate in view of his coming consulship. He was friendly to Octavian but would hardly have supported Octavian’s ambitions to the full. Lucius may well be L. Julius Caesar, consul of 64 B.C., and Antony’s uncle; see Pauly-Wiss. Julius 145. He opposed his nephew Antony in 44 and supported the senate, though he also tried to restrain the senate from declaring open war on Antony in 43. We are not told what his attitude toward Octavian was, but his opposition to Antony, his frequent support of Cicero, his desire for peace, and his friendship for [Pg 113] conservatives like L. Piso, P. Servilius Vatia, Servius Sulpicius, and Philippus make it probable that he favored Octavian’s opposition of Antony without supporting Octavian’s extreme ambitions. E. Schwartz (Hermes 33, p. 184) suggests that L. Piso is here referred to. This is possible, but in view of the fact that L. Julius Caesar was proscribed by the triumvirs in 43, it is more likely that he is the one attacked by Nicolaus.

The Publius referred to is probably P. Servilius Vatia. He was a man of little force of character, who half-heartedly supported the senate against Antony in 44 and 43. The fact that Lucius Caesar, against Cicero’s advice, nominated him in 43 as proconsul to oppose Dolabella, proves that he belongs to the moderate group which did not wish to offend Caesar’s soldiers or Octavian by giving open support to Brutus and Cassius (Cic., Phil., 11, 19). Brutus (Cic., ad Brut., 1, 16) as early as May, 43, took Cicero to task for commending his own safety to Octavian; in ad Brut. 1, 17, 5, he alludes to the terms to which Octavian had come with Cicero, in that the youth addressed the elder man as ‘pater’.

[145] Gallia Narbonensis (compare Dio 43, 51). Lepidus became triumvir with Antony and Octavian in 43.

[146] See Cic., Phil., 5, 6; Fam. 10, 1, ff. Plancus had [Pg 114] been nominated consul for the year 42 by Caesar. He held Gallia Comata under the provisions of the ‘lex Julia,’ concerning the assignment of provinces. Antony endeavored to displace him through the ‘lex tribunicia de provinciis,’ enacted in the early part of June, 44, but his position was confirmed by a ‘senatus consultum’ of December 20, which provided that the provincial governors should retain their tenures until the senate itself should appoint successors (Cic., Phil., 3, 38).

[147] Compare Dio 45, 10; App. 4, 84. Pollio was already in his province when Caesar was murdered, according to his reference to the Ides of March in Cic., Fam., 10, 31, 4.

[148] See App. 3, 2; Cic., Att., 14, 13, 2. D. Brutus had gone to his province in April 44 B.C.

[149] Brutus’ official name was Q. Servilius Caepio after his adoption by his uncle, though he continued to be called M. Junius Brutus by his friends. ‘Gaius’ is probably an error of the excerptor.

[150] For the year 44, the lawful praetor for Macedonia was Q. Hortensius (Cic., Phil., 10, 11; 10, 13; 10, 26).

[151] Syria was under L. Staius Murcus, followed by Q. Marcius Crispus (App. 3, 77) until the advent of Cassius (Dio 47, 27-28; Cic., Fam., 12, 11, 1; 12, 12, 3). There is confusion among the historians as to what provinces were actually assigned to Brutus and Cassius for the [Pg 115] year 43. Appian 3, 2; 3, 7-8; 3, 12; 3, 16; 3, 24; 3, 36; 4, 37, states that Brutus and Cassius were appointed for Macedonia and Syria. Florus 2, 17, 4 says also that Caesar had given them Macedonia and Syria. Plutarch, Caes., 57; Ant. 14; Cic. 42; Brut. 19, as consistently state that Brutus and Cassius received no provinces until after Caesar’s death; the senate ultimately assigned Crete and ‘Libya’ (Plut., Brut., 19). Dio 47, 21 explicitly states that Macedonia and Syria never were given to Brutus and Cassius, but that Crete and Bithynia were. Appian 3, 8 mentions Cyrenaica and Crete, and as an alternative report, Cyrenaica and Crete for Cassius and Bithynia for Brutus. The sequel is, of course, well known. Brutus and Cassius seized Macedonia and Syria forcibly. W. Sternkopf, Hermes 47, pp. 340-347, has shown that the versions of Appian and Florus, that Caesar had given Macedonia and Syria to Brutus and Cassius for the year 43, are incorrect. Perhaps his most cogent point is that Cicero nowhere condemns Antony and Dolabella for having diverted from Brutus and Cassius provinces originally ordained for them. In fact Cicero (Phil. 11, 27-30) endorses Brutus and Cassius for having appropriated provinces which belonged, according to written law (legibus scriptis) to others (Macedoniam alienam; Syriam, alienam provinciam). [Pg 116] It should be noticed that the phrase of Nicolaus regarding Brutus, ‘Μακεδονίᾳ δὲ Γ. Βροῦτος ἔφεδρος ἦν’ is not entirely clear. It is just possible that Appian’s grave error is due to a misunderstanding of Nicolaus or of Nicolaus’ source if that also contained some ambiguous expression like ἔφεδρος.

[152] Caesar had not bequeathed his position in the state to Octavian, though he had doubtless intended, should he live long enough, to be able eventually to name his successor. This passage is interesting in revealing the point of view of Octavian, whose memoirs Nicolaus used.

29.[153] According to App. 3, 28, Octavian himself, accompanied by a following of civilians, canvassed the plebeians, endeavoring to excite their anger against Antony.

[154] In Appian’s account (3, 29-30, 39) Antony is said to have been in need of Octavian’s assistance in order to procure the exchange of provinces.

[155] A lacuna here intervenes, so that the account of the actual reconciliation is wanting. Appian, 3, 29-30, 39, agrees in the main with Nicolaus; Antony is influenced by his military tribunes, former soldiers of Caesar. In Dio 45, 8 Octavian and Antony are said to have made mutual concessions. According to Plutarch, Ant., 16, Antony became apprehensive on finding that Octavian [Pg 117] had joined forces with his more powerful foes, among whom was Cicero.

30.[156] For a commentary on the swing of public opinion from Antony to Octavian, see App. 3; 12, 21, 23, 24, 29; Dio 45, 8; Plut., Ant., 16. R. Duttlinger, op. cit., pp. 77-78, directs attention to the fact that Appian presents Antony in a fairer light in this connection than do Nicolaus, Dio, or Plutarch, thus indicating a probable diversity of sources.

[157] On the authority of the ‘lex de permutatione provinciarum’ of June 1-2, 44 B.C. W. Sternkopf, Hermes 47, p. 357 ff. and Ciceros ausgewählte Reden, vol. 8, p. 9 and note, declares that this act is identical with the ‘lex tribunicia de provinciis,’ both having been ratified at the same meeting. The former term is employed by Livy, Epit., 117; the latter by Cicero, Phil., 5, 7. The combined result was that Antony should have part or all of Gaul in place of Macedonia, and that both consuls should enjoy an imperium extended for five years. In the historians the references to the exchange of provinces are: Dio 45; 9, 20, 25; 46; 23, 24; Appian 3; 27, 29, 30, 31, 37, 38, 52, 55, 63.

[158] Antony left Rome October 9: ‘Antonius autem ... a.d. VII Id. Oct. Brundisium erat profectus’ (Cic., Fam., 12, 23, 2). Also App. 3, 40.

[159][Pg 118] This is the only occurrence of the spelling ‘Atia’ in the excerpt. Elsewhere the name is given ‘Antia’.

[160] Appian 3, 39, and Plutarch, Ant., 16, both seem to discredit the report that Octavian made an attempt against Antony’s life, though they do not endeavor to deny it so vigorously as does Nicolaus. Suetonius, Aug. 10; Velleius 2, 60, and Seneca, de Clem., 1, 9, 1, all indicate that the attempt was really made. Cicero, Fam., 12, 23, 2, both believes and approves of it, though it is possible that he was carried away by his own desire rather than that he weighed conclusive contemporaneous evidence. He remarks, however, that the populace did not believe it, and that Antony never gave a report on the prisoners he was supposed to have seized. In Phil. 3, 19, he goes so far as to take upon himself the credit for having urged Octavian to the deed. The circumstantial refutation of Nicolaus comes doubtless from Augustus’ memoirs.

31.[161] Lacuna. Octavian’s exploit in securing enlistments in Campania is referred to by the following: App. 3; 40, 58; Dio 45; 12, 38; Suet., Aug., 10; Vell. 2, 61; Plut., Ant., 16; Cic. 44; Tac., Ann., 1, 10; Cic., Phil., 3, 3; 4, 3; 5, 23, 44. Nicolaus is unique in stating that Octavian first approached the Seventh and Eighth Legions. Both of these were composed of veterans (Cic., Phil., 14, 27; [Pg 119] CIL 10, 4786). Beside the fact that Octavian offered an inducement toward enlisting to the extent of 500 denarii ($80) to each man, the veterans were glad to aid him oppose Antony because of a new colony established by the latter near Casilinum (Cic., Phil., 2, 100-102) which served to make Antony unpopular with the Caesarian veterans who had a prior claim to the ground. (M. Cary, Journal of Philology, 70, pp. 174-190, treats of the land legislation of Caesar in regard to Campania. He is of the opinion that Casilinum and Calatia, being settled by veterans of the Civil War, must have been founded under a later statute than the ‘lex Campana’ of 59 B.C.) Octavian’s levy was not authorized; it was therefore a revolutionary measure. Nicolaus takes pains to show that Octavian reached his decision only after Antony proved that he was destined upon war. In this Nicolaus apparently makes a good case: Antony left for Brundisium on October 9, and Octavian is represented as forming his decision and departing for Campania a few days later. Confirmation comes from Cicero, who on November 2 wrote significantly to Atticus (16, 8), ‘On the afternoon of the first I had a letter from Octavian. He is making a great undertaking. The veterans at Casilinum and Calatia he has won over to his side. Nor is this [Pg 120] strange; he gives 500 denarii apiece. Evidently he means to wage war with Antony. And so I see that in a few days we shall be in arms. But whom are we to follow? Consider his name and his age.’

[162] Q. Juventius and M. Modialius are unknown. L. Maecenas is incorrectly written for C. Maecenas, of whom this seems to be the earliest mention. M. Agrippa had been a companion of Octavian at Apollonia. ‘Lucius’ may be L. Cocceius Nerva, great-grandfather of the emperor Nerva. He is mentioned as a trusted friend of Octavian in 41, and thence throughout his life.

[163] The several references to his mother could only have come from Augustus’ own memoirs.

[164] Appian 3, 24, incorrectly states that Brutus and Cassius left Italy shortly after the ‘ludi Apollinares’ in July. Dio 47, 20, is more accurate in saying that they delayed in Campania for a time. Cic., Fam. 11, 3, was sent from Naples August 4 by Brutus and Cassius to Antony; and Cicero addressed Cassius at Puteoli in the early part of October (Cic., Fam., 12, 2; 12, 3). Brutus and Cassius would scarcely have been concerned over the news of the young Octavian’s preparations; their departure, though it coincided in time with Octavian’s levy was not caused by this.

[165] Calatia was apparently the home of the Seventh Legion, [Pg 121] since he had decided to approach this first. His effort was successful, for the Seventh Legion took part in the battle of Forum Gallorum (Cic., Phil., 14, 10, 27).

[166] The next colony was apparently Casilinum, where was the Eighth Legion.

[167] According to Cicero (Fam., 12, 23, 2) Octavian went in person to Brundisium to win over the four legions just arrived from Macedonia.

[168] Appian mentions this means of propaganda in 3; 31, 39, 44. His first reference to it in 3, 31 antedates his account of Octavian’s alleged attempt against Antony’s life; this anticipation is of course incorrect.

Clayton Morris Hall was born at Ruxton, Maryland, September 24, 1896. From 1908 to 1914 he was prepared for college at the Boys’ Latin School, Baltimore. In the autumn of 1914 he entered the College of Arts and Sciences of the Johns Hopkins University, whence he received the degree of Bachelor of Arts in 1918. During 1918-1919 he was in the United States Army. In the autumn of 1919 he began graduate work in Latin, Classical Archaeology, and Greek in the Johns Hopkins University, and held, from 1920 to 1922, a Johns Hopkins Scholarship.