Cicero and Late Republic

Breakdown of the Republic Conspiracy of Catiline: a "case study" in the problems of the Late

Republic: Sulla’s dictatorship in 82 B.C. - Caesar’s dictatorship in 44 B.C.

Lucus Cornelius Sulla dictator (81-79)

first to turn a Roman army against the city of Rome remembered by Cicero's generation as "the" civil war proscriptions: list of names of "enemies of the state," published by

dictator; could be killed with impunity, property seized by state veterans, settled on farms but unsuccessful, later become followers of

Catiline

Cicero career in the Late Republic first great speech: defending an enemy of the dictator Sulla in 80

BC consul 63 (suppresses Catilinarian conspiracy) supported die-hard conservatives in the senate (optimates) negotiated with both Caesar and Pompey, but preferred Pompey invited to join the First Triumvirate (a private alliance with Caesar

and Pompey) but turned it down driven into exile 58-57 by his political enemies, recalled with

Pompey's help sided with Pompey in the Civil War 49-46 BC pardoned by Caesar after Caesar's death, bitterly attacked Caesar's lieutenant Mark

Antony died 43 BC in the proscriptions when Antony and Octavian joined

forces had a front seat on the fall of the Republic – we see these events

through his eyes

MARCUS TULLIUS CICERO

Cicero’s Political Alignments Optimates & Populares

popularis (plural = populares): one who uses unorthodox methods (usually appealing to groups of people outside the senate) to gain political power

optimate: one who defends the traditional ways of the senate distinction is one of METHOD only both optimates & populares are usually senators both optimates & populares want political power many populares wealthy, aristocratic, even patrician (Catiline,

e.g.) some optimates “new men” (Cicero) the same person might switch sides several times: Pompey

starts out as a popularis (gaining power in unorthodox ways), but ends as an optimate (fights at head of senatorial faction opposing the new popularis, Caesar)

question to ask: is X acting like a popular politician in a specific situation? If so, why?

ROMAN POLITICS politics NOT issue-driven

politicians did fight over issues, but issues were not the heart of politics

issues don't get you elected – personal loyalty does politicians take different sides of an issue to signal their personal

loyalty accounts for startling inconsistencies consistency lies in being loyal to your friends and hostile to your

enemies

optimates and populares: shifting boundaries

political alignments fall roughly along the lines of optimates vs. populares

but it isn't that neat or easy some people are always optimates – Cicero some people are always populares – Catiline, Clodius, Caesar others shift over time: Pompey moves from being a popularis to

working with optimates; Caelius flip-flops repeatedly optimates, populares are not neat, organized political parties

Friends and enemies in Roman Politics

friends = amici, friendship = amicitia enemies = inimici, enmity = inimicitia all of Roman politics organized around "factions" of friends and

enemies ("factio" originally an insult, but modern scholars use terms to

mean loose alliance based on personal relationships) again, these can shift – friendships can be formed for convenience,

and dissolved just as quickly (e.g. Pompey and Caesar) all of Roman politics is directed toward advancing one's own

career by helping your friends and hurting your enemies importance of dignitas ("worth," status among your peers);

senators intensely concerned whether their status is rising or falling