The dynamic of the century could be well summarized by one of its most famous events: the assassination of Julius Caesar, in 44 BCE As the circle of almost two dozen
conspirators
closed around him on the Ides of March, and each one delivered a knife thrust, the mortally wounded Caesar recognized the faces of several men whom he thought were his friends, including Brutus.
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome_nodrm
?
?
?
?
?
?
according to some writers: Unlike many ancient nonfiction authors, Plutarch is very generous with information about his sources, especially when we consider that he was writing in a time when con- ventions like bibliographies, foot- notes, and works cited lists were unknown, and never created or uti- lized.
Often, Plutarch will mention his source(s) by name, as he does with Aeschines, a few lines below.
Other times, he might refer to sources with a more generic phrase such as the one highlighted here: "according to some writers.
"
Aeschines: Aeschines (393-322 BCE) was a Greek orator and rival of Demosthenes. Three of his speeches are extant, but unfortunately, the Socratic dialogue he wrote featuring Aspasia does not survive. His speech Against Ctesiphon (330 BCE) was directed against Demosthenes, whose friend Ctesiphon had pro- posed that Demosthenes be awarded a golden crown for his many years of service to Athens. The offended Aeschines took the matter to court, and made his speech; Demosthenes's response (On the Crown) so effectively de- molished Aeschines's arguments that, having badly lost his case, he eventually retired to the island of Rhodes. The story goes that he once gave an encore performance of his Against Ctesiphon for the Rhodians, whereupon they marveled that he did not prevail against his famed opponent. "You would not be sur- prised," replied Aeschines, "if you had heard Demosthenes. "
? ? ? 160
Women in Politics? In Ancient Athens?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Callias: Callias owned an imposing home in Athens, which he often made available to philosophers and sophists for their discussions and social gatherings. The philosophical discussion reported in Plato's Protagoras (see chapter 2, on edu- cation) took place at the home of Callias, as did an elaborate banquet described in the historian Xeno- phon's dialogue, entitled, logically enough, Banquet. (Plato recounts an amusing vignette about the arrival of Socrates and a couple of his friends at Callias's front door. The group was in the midst of a serious discussion on some question that had arisen as they were walking to Callias's house, so before knock- ing, they continued their discus- sion. But from inside the house, the butler overheard the talking-- according to Plato, "very likely the great number of sophists . . . made him annoyed with callers at the house"--and so when Socrates did finally knock, the butler opened the door, immediately told the new arrivals to get lost, and slammed the door in their faces. They knocked again. This time, the but- ler did not even open the door but repeated his earlier instruction to them, through the closed door. Finally, after many entreaties, including Socrates's claim that they were not sophists, the butler reluc- tantly admitted them. )
Ionian woman: Ionia was a sort of generic place-name, applied to the western coast of Asia Minor, modern Turkey. Generic place- names are still used today; for example, the northeastern United States is often collectively called "New England. " Since Aspasia's hometown of Miletus was located
? ? ? ? AFTERMATH
Pericles's political opponents found it very difficult to oppose him directly, so they often adopted the strategy of trying to weaken his popularity and influence by attacking his friends and associates. For example, they contrived to put on trial the famous sculptor Pheidias, a close friend of Pericles, on a charge of impiety, because he had allegedly carved his own likeness into a shield held by a statue of the goddess Athena. Pheidias was convicted and died soon thereafter. Likewise, Aspasia was tried, for impiety and also for "pro- curing free-born Athenian women for Pericles and receiving them into her house. " Pericles was able to come to her rescue and win her an acquittal by addressing the jury personally, and with great emotion.
Six months after Pericles's death, Aspasia married the sheep dealer Lysicles, who, despite his low birth, was chosen as a general of the Athenian army in 428. Some suggest that he owed his new- found prominence to the machinations of Aspasia. Shortly after his military appointment, he and four other generals, along with a contingent of soldiers, were sent out to the hinterlands of Caria, in southwestern Ionia, to do some fund-raising from among the cities allied to Athens. (This was during the initial stages of the Peloponnesian War, when Athens was trying to enhance its military capabilities and required money from outside sources to do so. ) The Carians did not appreciate these efforts, and in the end, they attacked and killed Lysicles, along with a large number of his soldiers.
Aspasia continued to live on in Athens after her husband's death. It is thought that she died sometime during the last decade of the fifth century.
ASK YOURSELF
1. Plutarch says that the Ionian woman Thargelia was instru- mental in sowing "the seeds of sympathy for the Persians . . . throughout the Greek cities. " And yet it is known that there was widespread resentment and resistance to Persian rule on the part of the cities in Ionia. So why do you suppose Thargelia, from Ionia, was apparently trying to advance the Persian cause in her home region?
2. "Power couples. " We hear the phrase quite often these days. Do you think that Pericles and Aspasia could have been considered a "power couple"? What do you suppose Pericles's rival politicians thought when they heard the news that Pericles and Aspasia were "together" (although they apparently never married, because Aspasia was foreign-born)?
? ? ? 161
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? in Ionia, Thargelia obviously came
from the same region.
Pericles' death: Pericles was a victim of
the plague that ravaged Athens in
the 420s. Pericles died in 429. Xanthippus and Paralus: Plutarch records that both Xanthippus and Paralus died from the plague and that both predeceased Pericles. Even though Pericles had thus lost both sons, as well as his sister and many other relatives and friends, he always kept his composure at their funerals. Always, that is, until the death of Paralus, his last remaining legitimate son, during whose funeral, Plutarch says, Pericles "broke into a passion
of tears and sobs. "
? ? ? ? TOPICS TO CONSIDER
e One of the books cited in the "Further informa- tion" section below is Madeleine Henry's Prisoner of History: Aspasia of Miletus and Her Biographical Tradition. In the publisher's description of the book, there appears this sen- tence: "[C]ontinued uncritical reception of her depiction in Attic [i. e. , Athenian] comedy and nai? ve acceptance of Plutarch's account of her in his Life of Pericles prevent us from understand- ing who she was and what her contributions to Greek thought might have been. " Plutarch was a thorough and careful researcher, whose credi- bility has stood the test of time. Why, then, do you suppose some contemporary critics consider it "nai? ve" to accept his account of Aspasia? Do you see anything in the document that would lead you to believe you are being "prevent[ed] . . . from understanding who she was and what her contributions to Greek thought might have been"?
e Plato's dialogue Menexenus is relatively short, and most of it is com- prised of the funeral oration that (according to Plato) Aspasia wrote and Socrates recited. Read Aspasia's speech. Does it sound convincing? Is it well organized? Based only on this speech, would you say that Aspasia deserved her apparently solid reputation as a philosopher and rhetorician?
e As mentioned above, ancient historians, biographers, and other nonfic- tion authors never cited their sources in formats with which we are famil- iar today: bibliographies, footnotes, quotation marks, parenthetical citations, and the like. And they certainly never asked, formally or other- wise, for permission to use or quote material from another author's books in their own work. Apparently, these authors, and the scholarly commu- nity in general, believed that no one could "own" words, ideas, and infor- mation, and therefore, it would be ludicrous to ask permission of, or to offer payment to, another author for the use of his written material. Things are different these days, where copyright laws and antiplagiarism
? ? ? ? ? ASPASIA AS A MATCHMAKER
Among her many other talents, Aspasia was a noted matchmaker. According to the historian Xenophon (in Memorabilia), Socrates once solicited her thoughts on this topic. She responded by stating that above all, a matchmaker has to be certain that she does not misrepresent the qualities or personalities of the people whom she is trying to match. For if she conveys inaccurate or false information, not only will the poorly matched cou- ple hate each other; they will hate the matchmaker, too, which in turn, obviously would damage the match- maker's reputation.
? ? 162
guidelines have combined to form rigid citation and permission rules to which nonfiction authors must adhere. Which system do you think is superior? Why?
e Plutarch says that Pericles persuaded the Assembly to pass a decree authorizing Athenian military action against the island of Samos (off the western coast of Ionia), because the Samians had disobeyed an Athenian order to end their war against the city of Miletus. (The two of them were fighting over possession of Priene, another city in Ionia. ) Some Athenians believed that Aspasia was responsible for fomenting Athenian involve- ment in this conflict. Why would that suspicion have arisen? Does it make sense?
Further Information
Henry, Madeleine M. Prisoner of History: Aspasia of Miletus and Her Biographical Tradition. Oxford, 1995.
Radice, Betty. Who's Who in the Ancient World (s. v. "Aspasia"). Baltimore, 1973. Websites
Aspasia. http://www. newworldencyclopedia. org/entry/Aspasia
Aspasia biography. http://www. yourdictionary. com/biography/aspasia
Aspasia of Miletus. http://penelope. uchicago. edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/greece/
hetairai/aspasia. html
Bibliography for Document
Bury, The Rev. R. G. (tr. ). Plato: Timaeus; Critias; Cleitophon; Menexenus, Epistles. [LCL. ] London and Cambridge, 1929.
Scott-Kilvert, Ian (tr. ). Plutarch: The Rise and Fall of Athens: Nine Greek Lives. New York, 1960.
Women in Politics? In Ancient Athens?
? ? ? ? ASPASIA AS AN AUTHOR
Aspasia was reputedly the author of not one, but two, funeral orations, including perhaps the most famous such oration of all: the one that Pericles delivered after the first year of fighting in the Peloponnesian War, in which, among other things, he declared that Athens was the "school of Greece. " She receives credit for authoring the second one by no less an authority than Plato, in his dialogue Menexenus. The title character and Socrates are discussing the art of crafting and delivering such a speech: "Menexenus: And do you think that you yourself would be able to make the speech, if required . . . Socrates: That I should be able to make the speech would be nothing [surprising], Menexenus. For she who is my instructor is by no means weak in the art of rhetoric. On the contrary, she has turned out many fine orators, and amongst them one who surpassed all other Greeks, Pericles, the son of Xanthippus. Menexenus: Who is she? But you mean Aspasia, no doubt. Socrates: I do. " [Plato. Menexenus 235 E; 236 A. tr. Bury. ] Socrates goes on to explain that on the previous day, he had heard Aspasia rehearsing a funeral speech that she was preparing. Some of it she had already written; other parts of it she was making up on the spot, and she was doing all of this at the same time she was working on Pericles's funeral oration. Socrates apparently had a copy of the first speech, and Menexenus prevailed upon him to recite it. The rest of the dialogue is taken up with Socrates's presentation of Aspasia's speech.
? ? 163
This page intentionally left blank
32. HOMEGROWN TERRORISM?
INTRODUCTION
First-century BCE Roman politics was as well documented as it was muddled. We have more first-hand literary sources of information about that century than any other in Roman--or Greek--history. It was a time of egomaniacal military and political leaders, whose goals seemed to include domination of the Roman government, and also a time of idealistic individuals determined to stop them. It was a time of shifting political alliances and shifting friendships, changes that seemed to happen weekly . . . or daily . . . or even hourly.
The dynamic of the century could be well summarized by one of its most famous events: the assassination of Julius Caesar, in 44 BCE As the circle of almost two dozen conspirators closed around him on the Ides of March, and each one delivered a knife thrust, the mortally wounded Caesar recognized the faces of several men whom he thought were his friends, including Brutus. Young Brutus, his prote? ge? . No wonder Caesar was struck with disbelief--"even you, Brutus? "--at being stabbed in the back, both literally and figuratively, by a friend. Or was he a friend? First century Roman politicians who wanted to survive needed to know who their friends were.
One of the most famous--or infamous--Roman politicians of the time was the dis- appointed office-seeker Lucius Sergius Catilina, better known today as Catiline. Catiline had been a provincial governor (in Africa) in 66, and at the close of his tenure there, he returned to Rome, hoping to run for election to the top office in the Roman government, the consulship. However, irregularities in his African administration pre- cluded his candidacy. He was put on trial for provincial mismanagement, acquitted, and again decided to run for the consulship, this time in 64. He lost. He tried again the next year, and lost again. Now, in effect a three-time loser, Catiline began to search for a more direct, less constitutional, method to gain power: a military coup, which he began organizing toward the end of the year 63. He eventually amassed a large army of followers, over 10,000, and his plot might have worked had not one man gotten in the way, one of the duly elected consuls for 63, the famous orator, lawyer, and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero.
Cicero found out about Catiline's plot, and exposed it in a memorable series of four speeches, delivered near the end of 63. The document consists of the first several paragraphs of his first speech against Catiline, on November 7, 63.
? ? 165
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
? KEEP IN MIND AS YOU READ
1. The Roman Senate was not an elected, legislative body, like the United States Senate, but instead was composed of nonelected statesmen and politicians, drawn from the ranks of former officeholders, who remained senators for life. Its numbers fluctuated, but generally hovered around 300. The Senate's primary role was advi- sory (although its advice was taken seriously, given the composition of its member- ship), but it also exercised some control over financial matters and foreign policy issues. The Senate met when convened by a consul, and Cicero had good reason to call a meeting for November 7: he had been the target of a failed assassination plot engineered by Catiline!
2. Catiline himself had the audacity to attend the November 7 Senate meeting, even though he must have known, or at least suspected, that he was about to be denounced by one of the most eloquent orators of all time. It is uncertain whether Catiline delivered a rebuttal; there is some indication that he made an effort to deny the charges. Or, as some believe, he may have simply walked out of the temple where the meeting took place without attempting to make a reply. It does seem clear, however, that he was shunned by the senators and took a seat by himself during Cicero's speech, well apart from the others.
3. One of the interesting, if unanswerable, questions about Cicero's speech is whether he had a written text of it or simply delivered it extemporaneously. It seems unlikely that he carried a manuscript, or even notes, with him to address the Senate; Roman (and Greek) orators always used elaborate and vigorous arm and hand gestures during their speeches, and it is difficult to envision an orator encumbered by sheets or rolls of paper being able to perform the appropriate gestures. Cicero probably had prepared and rehearsed the speech in advance, rather than making it up as he went along, but he almost certainly did not read it.
4. Like modern attorneys, Cicero bases many of his arguments on legal and historical precedents.
Document: When Cicero Speaks, People
Listen!
In the name of heaven, Catiline, how long do you propose to exploit our patience? Do you really suppose that your lunatic activities are going to escape our retaliation for evermore? Are there to be no limits to this audacious, uncontrollable swaggering? Look at the garrison of our Roman nation which guards the Palatine by night, look at the patrols ranging the city, the whole population gripped by terror, the entire body of loyal citizens massing at one single spot!
Look at this meeting of our Senate behind strongly fortified defenses, see the expressions on the countenances of every one of these men who are here! Have none of these sights made the smallest impact on your heart? You must be well aware that your plot has been detected. Now that every single person in this place knows all about your conspiracy, you cannot fail to realize it is doomed. Do you suppose there is a single individual here who has not got
? ? 166
A group of senators outside the Temple of Jupiter, Roman, fourth century CE. (Louvre, Paris, France/ Alinari/The Bridgeman Art Library)
the very fullest information about what you were doing last night and the night before, where you went, the men you summoned, the plans you concocted?
What a scandalous commentary on our age and its standards! For the senate knows all about these things. The consul sees them being done. And yet this man still lives! Lives? He walks right into the Senate. He joins in our national debates--watches and notes and marks down with his gaze each one of us he plots to assassinate. And we, how brave we are! Just by getting out of the way of his frenzied onslaught, we feel we are doing patriotic duty enough.
But yours was the death which the consul should have ordered long ago. The calamity which you have long been planning for each one of us ought to have rebounded on to yourself alone. The noble Publius Scipio Nasica, who was chief priest but held no admin- istrative office, killed Tiberius Gracchus, although his threat to the national security was only on a limited scale [unlike the much more serious danger posed by
Homegrown Terrorism?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? chief priest: As the title suggests, the pontifex maximus (chief priest) was in charge of official religious func- tions and supervisor of all priests in Rome. Although the responsibilities of the chief priest were mostly reli- gious, there was also a political dimension: the chief priest had to be elected, which necessitated a political campaign--but only once, because he held the position for life.
consul: Remember, there were two con- suls each year. It is not totally clear whether Cicero is referring to him- self here or to the other consul for the year, Gaius Antonius Hybrida. (Interestingly, Hybrida was once thought to have Catilinarian
? ? ? 167
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
Catiline]. Shall we, then, who hold the office of consuls, tolerate Catiline when he is determined to plunge the world into fire and slaughter? Upon precedents that go too far back into antiquity, such as the act of Gaius Servilius Ahala who with his own hand slew Spurius Maelius for plotting a revolution, I shall not dwell, except to say that at former epochs, in this country of ours, brave men did not lack the courage to strike down a dangerous Roman citizen more fiercely even than they struck down the bitterest of foreign foes. Moreover, we have in our hands, Catiline, a decree of the Senate that is specifically aimed against yourself, and a formidable and stern decree it is. From this body, then, the state has no lack of counsel and authority. I tell you frankly, it is we, the consuls, who are not doing our duty. [Tr. Michael Grant. Selected Political Speeches of Cicero. (Against Lucius Sergius Catilina. I. 1-3. ) Penguin Classics, 1969. Page numbers: 76, 77. ]
AFTERMATH
Catiline stormed out of the Senate meeting after the speech and left Rome to join up with his revolutionary army, which was quartered not far away. The next day, November 8, Cicero made a speech to the general population outlining the situation and trying to prevent panic. Meanwhile, the conspirators who remained in Rome after Catiline's abrupt departure on the 7th imprudently divulged their plans to some ambassadors from Gaul (modern France) who hap- pened to be in the city; apparently, the conspirators were hoping that the ambassadors would provide them with additional man- power and supplies. But instead, the Gauls reported the information to Cicero, replete with written documentation. It was precisely the break he needed!
Five of the ringleaders of the conspiracy were apprehended and detained. On December 3, Cicero delivered his third Catilinarian oration, directly to the Roman people, in which he explained the most recent developments in the case against Catiline. Two days later, the Roman Senate debated the issue; during this debate, Cicero brought forth his fourth and final oration against Catiline. The Senate voted for execution, and the sentence was carried out immediately, with Cicero's support and supervision. (Although the Senate's vote did not have the force of law, such was that body's in- fluence in Roman politics that Cicero, and others, would have felt comfortable in interpreting a senatorial decree as tantamount to legal sanction for his actions. )
For the next 20 years of his life, until he was killed in 43, Cicero looked back with pride on his role in suppressing the
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? sympathies, but Cicero gained his support by promising to help him obtain a desirable province to gov- ern after his term as consul had expired. )
the consul should have ordered:
Here, Cicero seems to be referenc- ing himself, not his colleague Hybrida. In October 63, the Senate had passed a resolution con- ferring wide-ranging powers upon the consuls for the protection of the state in an emergency. (This was the senatus consultum ultimum, often abbreviated as S. C. U. , or "final decree of the Senate," some- what similar to martial law in our own times. Such a decree empow- ered the consuls to order execu- tions of individuals deemed to pose a serious danger to the state. )
decree of the Senate: The senatus con- sultum ultimum, mentioned above. the expressions on the countenances: According to Ciceronian commen- tator Albert Harkness, Cicero is here referring to the "looks of sur- prise and indignation with which the senate received Catiline as he
took his seat . . . "
Gaius Servilius Ahala: As he himself
admits, Cicero is reaching far back into Roman history for this prec- edent: 439 BCE. Spurius Maelius was a wealthy plebeian who, at a time of famine and food shortages, was able to devote his own resources to the provision of cheap corn for his starving fellow countrymen. This altruistic action stirred suspicions among the leaders of the Roman government that Spurius was in reality trying to court popular favor, so as to position himself for a run at royal power. Accordingly, the government sent their representative Ahala to deal with Spurius, and deal
? ? ? ? ? 168
Catilinarian conspiracy as the time when he almost single- handedly saved the Roman state. But his political enemies con- demned him for his actions in this case, because he ordered the summary execution of the five men without giving them an opportunity to appeal their death sentences, as required by Roman law.
ASK YOURSELF
1. Why do you suppose Catiline showed up at this meeting of the Roman Senate when he very likely knew that his plot was going to be exposed, and that he himself might be in physical danger?
2. Cicero refers to Publius Scipio Nasica as a vir amplissimus--a very distinguished man. Can we infer from those complimentary words that Cicero approved of Nasica's actions in leading the crowd of senators who struck down Tiberius Gracchus? Would that incident be sound precedent for Cicero to push ahead for the death penalty for the five conspirators?
3. Could Catiline be aptly described as a "home-grown terror- ist"? Why or why not?
TOPICS TO CONSIDER
e Although Catiline's conspiracy certainly posed an imminent threat to the Roman government, and its leading officeholders, especially Cicero, some historians have argued that Cicero's speech against Catiline contains elements of exaggeration. Could you identify any places in the document where Cicero seems to be going a bit overboard in what he says?
e Ciceroargueddozensofcourtcasesandmadedoz- ens of public speeches during his long career as a lawyer and orator. In court, he excelled both as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney, but he was probably more sharp-tongued when on the offen- sive, as he is in the speech against Catiline. Can you find examples in the document where Cicero seems to be sarcastic? Or instances where he engages in personal attacks?
e When the Senate engaged in its momentous December 5 debate on the fate of the five cap- tured conspirators, the first 16 speakers all argued in favor of the death penalty. The 17th speaker, however, suggested that they simply be imprisoned for life, and such was his eloquence that
Homegrown Terrorism?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? he did: he killed him. Spurius's true motives, therefore, are unknown. But Cicero makes it clear what he thought Spurius was up to.
last night and the night before:
Cicero may be referring, in part, to a meeting of the conspirators in which they discussed the details of assassinating him.
Palatine: The Palatine Hill, one of Rome's famous Seven Hills, was home to some of the city's wealthiest residents, who lived in exquisite mansions; our English words "pal- ace" and "palatial" derive from Palatine. The fact that the Palatine had to be patrolled by armed guards indicates the seriousness of the situa- tion caused by Catiline's conspiracy.
Publius Cornelius Scipio: Nasica was one of the consuls in 138 BCE. A short time later, in the turbulent year of 133, when the tribune Tiberius Gracchus had proposed a highly controversial land redistribu- tion measure, Nasica was a leader of the opposition. When Gracchus announced that he would run for reelection to the tribunate--a very nontraditional decision, given that the tribunes were term-limited to one year--Nasica demanded that the consuls take action to stop him. When they refused, Nasica led a band of senators, who were equipped with clubs and heavy sticks, to one of Gracchus's cam- paign rallies, with the apparent intention of taking matters into their own hands. Things quickly turned ugly; violence broke out, and Gracchus was killed. The biog- rapher Plutarch writes that this was the first time in all of Roman his- tory that the blood of citizens was shed in a civil disturbance.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? 169
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
Further Information
the Senate was at least temporarily inclined to go along with that proposal. That speaker's name: Julius Caesar. There has been speculation-- although no solid proof--that Caesar was at least a covert supporter of Catiline. Could this be true? If so, what reasons might Caesar have had for backing someone like Catiline?
e Imagine that you were given the assignment of defending Catiline in court. What arguments on his behalf could you present?
e Investigate the senatus consultum ultimum (S. C. U. ), "the final decree of the Senate. " Under what kinds of circumstances in Roman history had it been invoked prior to the trial of Catiline? What would be the modern equivalent of the S. C. U. ? Are there any similarities between ancient and modern usages of a decree like this?
? ? ? ? ?
Aeschines: Aeschines (393-322 BCE) was a Greek orator and rival of Demosthenes. Three of his speeches are extant, but unfortunately, the Socratic dialogue he wrote featuring Aspasia does not survive. His speech Against Ctesiphon (330 BCE) was directed against Demosthenes, whose friend Ctesiphon had pro- posed that Demosthenes be awarded a golden crown for his many years of service to Athens. The offended Aeschines took the matter to court, and made his speech; Demosthenes's response (On the Crown) so effectively de- molished Aeschines's arguments that, having badly lost his case, he eventually retired to the island of Rhodes. The story goes that he once gave an encore performance of his Against Ctesiphon for the Rhodians, whereupon they marveled that he did not prevail against his famed opponent. "You would not be sur- prised," replied Aeschines, "if you had heard Demosthenes. "
? ? ? 160
Women in Politics? In Ancient Athens?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Callias: Callias owned an imposing home in Athens, which he often made available to philosophers and sophists for their discussions and social gatherings. The philosophical discussion reported in Plato's Protagoras (see chapter 2, on edu- cation) took place at the home of Callias, as did an elaborate banquet described in the historian Xeno- phon's dialogue, entitled, logically enough, Banquet. (Plato recounts an amusing vignette about the arrival of Socrates and a couple of his friends at Callias's front door. The group was in the midst of a serious discussion on some question that had arisen as they were walking to Callias's house, so before knock- ing, they continued their discus- sion. But from inside the house, the butler overheard the talking-- according to Plato, "very likely the great number of sophists . . . made him annoyed with callers at the house"--and so when Socrates did finally knock, the butler opened the door, immediately told the new arrivals to get lost, and slammed the door in their faces. They knocked again. This time, the but- ler did not even open the door but repeated his earlier instruction to them, through the closed door. Finally, after many entreaties, including Socrates's claim that they were not sophists, the butler reluc- tantly admitted them. )
Ionian woman: Ionia was a sort of generic place-name, applied to the western coast of Asia Minor, modern Turkey. Generic place- names are still used today; for example, the northeastern United States is often collectively called "New England. " Since Aspasia's hometown of Miletus was located
? ? ? ? AFTERMATH
Pericles's political opponents found it very difficult to oppose him directly, so they often adopted the strategy of trying to weaken his popularity and influence by attacking his friends and associates. For example, they contrived to put on trial the famous sculptor Pheidias, a close friend of Pericles, on a charge of impiety, because he had allegedly carved his own likeness into a shield held by a statue of the goddess Athena. Pheidias was convicted and died soon thereafter. Likewise, Aspasia was tried, for impiety and also for "pro- curing free-born Athenian women for Pericles and receiving them into her house. " Pericles was able to come to her rescue and win her an acquittal by addressing the jury personally, and with great emotion.
Six months after Pericles's death, Aspasia married the sheep dealer Lysicles, who, despite his low birth, was chosen as a general of the Athenian army in 428. Some suggest that he owed his new- found prominence to the machinations of Aspasia. Shortly after his military appointment, he and four other generals, along with a contingent of soldiers, were sent out to the hinterlands of Caria, in southwestern Ionia, to do some fund-raising from among the cities allied to Athens. (This was during the initial stages of the Peloponnesian War, when Athens was trying to enhance its military capabilities and required money from outside sources to do so. ) The Carians did not appreciate these efforts, and in the end, they attacked and killed Lysicles, along with a large number of his soldiers.
Aspasia continued to live on in Athens after her husband's death. It is thought that she died sometime during the last decade of the fifth century.
ASK YOURSELF
1. Plutarch says that the Ionian woman Thargelia was instru- mental in sowing "the seeds of sympathy for the Persians . . . throughout the Greek cities. " And yet it is known that there was widespread resentment and resistance to Persian rule on the part of the cities in Ionia. So why do you suppose Thargelia, from Ionia, was apparently trying to advance the Persian cause in her home region?
2. "Power couples. " We hear the phrase quite often these days. Do you think that Pericles and Aspasia could have been considered a "power couple"? What do you suppose Pericles's rival politicians thought when they heard the news that Pericles and Aspasia were "together" (although they apparently never married, because Aspasia was foreign-born)?
? ? ? 161
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? in Ionia, Thargelia obviously came
from the same region.
Pericles' death: Pericles was a victim of
the plague that ravaged Athens in
the 420s. Pericles died in 429. Xanthippus and Paralus: Plutarch records that both Xanthippus and Paralus died from the plague and that both predeceased Pericles. Even though Pericles had thus lost both sons, as well as his sister and many other relatives and friends, he always kept his composure at their funerals. Always, that is, until the death of Paralus, his last remaining legitimate son, during whose funeral, Plutarch says, Pericles "broke into a passion
of tears and sobs. "
? ? ? ? TOPICS TO CONSIDER
e One of the books cited in the "Further informa- tion" section below is Madeleine Henry's Prisoner of History: Aspasia of Miletus and Her Biographical Tradition. In the publisher's description of the book, there appears this sen- tence: "[C]ontinued uncritical reception of her depiction in Attic [i. e. , Athenian] comedy and nai? ve acceptance of Plutarch's account of her in his Life of Pericles prevent us from understand- ing who she was and what her contributions to Greek thought might have been. " Plutarch was a thorough and careful researcher, whose credi- bility has stood the test of time. Why, then, do you suppose some contemporary critics consider it "nai? ve" to accept his account of Aspasia? Do you see anything in the document that would lead you to believe you are being "prevent[ed] . . . from understanding who she was and what her contributions to Greek thought might have been"?
e Plato's dialogue Menexenus is relatively short, and most of it is com- prised of the funeral oration that (according to Plato) Aspasia wrote and Socrates recited. Read Aspasia's speech. Does it sound convincing? Is it well organized? Based only on this speech, would you say that Aspasia deserved her apparently solid reputation as a philosopher and rhetorician?
e As mentioned above, ancient historians, biographers, and other nonfic- tion authors never cited their sources in formats with which we are famil- iar today: bibliographies, footnotes, quotation marks, parenthetical citations, and the like. And they certainly never asked, formally or other- wise, for permission to use or quote material from another author's books in their own work. Apparently, these authors, and the scholarly commu- nity in general, believed that no one could "own" words, ideas, and infor- mation, and therefore, it would be ludicrous to ask permission of, or to offer payment to, another author for the use of his written material. Things are different these days, where copyright laws and antiplagiarism
? ? ? ? ? ASPASIA AS A MATCHMAKER
Among her many other talents, Aspasia was a noted matchmaker. According to the historian Xenophon (in Memorabilia), Socrates once solicited her thoughts on this topic. She responded by stating that above all, a matchmaker has to be certain that she does not misrepresent the qualities or personalities of the people whom she is trying to match. For if she conveys inaccurate or false information, not only will the poorly matched cou- ple hate each other; they will hate the matchmaker, too, which in turn, obviously would damage the match- maker's reputation.
? ? 162
guidelines have combined to form rigid citation and permission rules to which nonfiction authors must adhere. Which system do you think is superior? Why?
e Plutarch says that Pericles persuaded the Assembly to pass a decree authorizing Athenian military action against the island of Samos (off the western coast of Ionia), because the Samians had disobeyed an Athenian order to end their war against the city of Miletus. (The two of them were fighting over possession of Priene, another city in Ionia. ) Some Athenians believed that Aspasia was responsible for fomenting Athenian involve- ment in this conflict. Why would that suspicion have arisen? Does it make sense?
Further Information
Henry, Madeleine M. Prisoner of History: Aspasia of Miletus and Her Biographical Tradition. Oxford, 1995.
Radice, Betty. Who's Who in the Ancient World (s. v. "Aspasia"). Baltimore, 1973. Websites
Aspasia. http://www. newworldencyclopedia. org/entry/Aspasia
Aspasia biography. http://www. yourdictionary. com/biography/aspasia
Aspasia of Miletus. http://penelope. uchicago. edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/greece/
hetairai/aspasia. html
Bibliography for Document
Bury, The Rev. R. G. (tr. ). Plato: Timaeus; Critias; Cleitophon; Menexenus, Epistles. [LCL. ] London and Cambridge, 1929.
Scott-Kilvert, Ian (tr. ). Plutarch: The Rise and Fall of Athens: Nine Greek Lives. New York, 1960.
Women in Politics? In Ancient Athens?
? ? ? ? ASPASIA AS AN AUTHOR
Aspasia was reputedly the author of not one, but two, funeral orations, including perhaps the most famous such oration of all: the one that Pericles delivered after the first year of fighting in the Peloponnesian War, in which, among other things, he declared that Athens was the "school of Greece. " She receives credit for authoring the second one by no less an authority than Plato, in his dialogue Menexenus. The title character and Socrates are discussing the art of crafting and delivering such a speech: "Menexenus: And do you think that you yourself would be able to make the speech, if required . . . Socrates: That I should be able to make the speech would be nothing [surprising], Menexenus. For she who is my instructor is by no means weak in the art of rhetoric. On the contrary, she has turned out many fine orators, and amongst them one who surpassed all other Greeks, Pericles, the son of Xanthippus. Menexenus: Who is she? But you mean Aspasia, no doubt. Socrates: I do. " [Plato. Menexenus 235 E; 236 A. tr. Bury. ] Socrates goes on to explain that on the previous day, he had heard Aspasia rehearsing a funeral speech that she was preparing. Some of it she had already written; other parts of it she was making up on the spot, and she was doing all of this at the same time she was working on Pericles's funeral oration. Socrates apparently had a copy of the first speech, and Menexenus prevailed upon him to recite it. The rest of the dialogue is taken up with Socrates's presentation of Aspasia's speech.
? ? 163
This page intentionally left blank
32. HOMEGROWN TERRORISM?
INTRODUCTION
First-century BCE Roman politics was as well documented as it was muddled. We have more first-hand literary sources of information about that century than any other in Roman--or Greek--history. It was a time of egomaniacal military and political leaders, whose goals seemed to include domination of the Roman government, and also a time of idealistic individuals determined to stop them. It was a time of shifting political alliances and shifting friendships, changes that seemed to happen weekly . . . or daily . . . or even hourly.
The dynamic of the century could be well summarized by one of its most famous events: the assassination of Julius Caesar, in 44 BCE As the circle of almost two dozen conspirators closed around him on the Ides of March, and each one delivered a knife thrust, the mortally wounded Caesar recognized the faces of several men whom he thought were his friends, including Brutus. Young Brutus, his prote? ge? . No wonder Caesar was struck with disbelief--"even you, Brutus? "--at being stabbed in the back, both literally and figuratively, by a friend. Or was he a friend? First century Roman politicians who wanted to survive needed to know who their friends were.
One of the most famous--or infamous--Roman politicians of the time was the dis- appointed office-seeker Lucius Sergius Catilina, better known today as Catiline. Catiline had been a provincial governor (in Africa) in 66, and at the close of his tenure there, he returned to Rome, hoping to run for election to the top office in the Roman government, the consulship. However, irregularities in his African administration pre- cluded his candidacy. He was put on trial for provincial mismanagement, acquitted, and again decided to run for the consulship, this time in 64. He lost. He tried again the next year, and lost again. Now, in effect a three-time loser, Catiline began to search for a more direct, less constitutional, method to gain power: a military coup, which he began organizing toward the end of the year 63. He eventually amassed a large army of followers, over 10,000, and his plot might have worked had not one man gotten in the way, one of the duly elected consuls for 63, the famous orator, lawyer, and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero.
Cicero found out about Catiline's plot, and exposed it in a memorable series of four speeches, delivered near the end of 63. The document consists of the first several paragraphs of his first speech against Catiline, on November 7, 63.
? ? 165
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
? KEEP IN MIND AS YOU READ
1. The Roman Senate was not an elected, legislative body, like the United States Senate, but instead was composed of nonelected statesmen and politicians, drawn from the ranks of former officeholders, who remained senators for life. Its numbers fluctuated, but generally hovered around 300. The Senate's primary role was advi- sory (although its advice was taken seriously, given the composition of its member- ship), but it also exercised some control over financial matters and foreign policy issues. The Senate met when convened by a consul, and Cicero had good reason to call a meeting for November 7: he had been the target of a failed assassination plot engineered by Catiline!
2. Catiline himself had the audacity to attend the November 7 Senate meeting, even though he must have known, or at least suspected, that he was about to be denounced by one of the most eloquent orators of all time. It is uncertain whether Catiline delivered a rebuttal; there is some indication that he made an effort to deny the charges. Or, as some believe, he may have simply walked out of the temple where the meeting took place without attempting to make a reply. It does seem clear, however, that he was shunned by the senators and took a seat by himself during Cicero's speech, well apart from the others.
3. One of the interesting, if unanswerable, questions about Cicero's speech is whether he had a written text of it or simply delivered it extemporaneously. It seems unlikely that he carried a manuscript, or even notes, with him to address the Senate; Roman (and Greek) orators always used elaborate and vigorous arm and hand gestures during their speeches, and it is difficult to envision an orator encumbered by sheets or rolls of paper being able to perform the appropriate gestures. Cicero probably had prepared and rehearsed the speech in advance, rather than making it up as he went along, but he almost certainly did not read it.
4. Like modern attorneys, Cicero bases many of his arguments on legal and historical precedents.
Document: When Cicero Speaks, People
Listen!
In the name of heaven, Catiline, how long do you propose to exploit our patience? Do you really suppose that your lunatic activities are going to escape our retaliation for evermore? Are there to be no limits to this audacious, uncontrollable swaggering? Look at the garrison of our Roman nation which guards the Palatine by night, look at the patrols ranging the city, the whole population gripped by terror, the entire body of loyal citizens massing at one single spot!
Look at this meeting of our Senate behind strongly fortified defenses, see the expressions on the countenances of every one of these men who are here! Have none of these sights made the smallest impact on your heart? You must be well aware that your plot has been detected. Now that every single person in this place knows all about your conspiracy, you cannot fail to realize it is doomed. Do you suppose there is a single individual here who has not got
? ? 166
A group of senators outside the Temple of Jupiter, Roman, fourth century CE. (Louvre, Paris, France/ Alinari/The Bridgeman Art Library)
the very fullest information about what you were doing last night and the night before, where you went, the men you summoned, the plans you concocted?
What a scandalous commentary on our age and its standards! For the senate knows all about these things. The consul sees them being done. And yet this man still lives! Lives? He walks right into the Senate. He joins in our national debates--watches and notes and marks down with his gaze each one of us he plots to assassinate. And we, how brave we are! Just by getting out of the way of his frenzied onslaught, we feel we are doing patriotic duty enough.
But yours was the death which the consul should have ordered long ago. The calamity which you have long been planning for each one of us ought to have rebounded on to yourself alone. The noble Publius Scipio Nasica, who was chief priest but held no admin- istrative office, killed Tiberius Gracchus, although his threat to the national security was only on a limited scale [unlike the much more serious danger posed by
Homegrown Terrorism?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? chief priest: As the title suggests, the pontifex maximus (chief priest) was in charge of official religious func- tions and supervisor of all priests in Rome. Although the responsibilities of the chief priest were mostly reli- gious, there was also a political dimension: the chief priest had to be elected, which necessitated a political campaign--but only once, because he held the position for life.
consul: Remember, there were two con- suls each year. It is not totally clear whether Cicero is referring to him- self here or to the other consul for the year, Gaius Antonius Hybrida. (Interestingly, Hybrida was once thought to have Catilinarian
? ? ? 167
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
Catiline]. Shall we, then, who hold the office of consuls, tolerate Catiline when he is determined to plunge the world into fire and slaughter? Upon precedents that go too far back into antiquity, such as the act of Gaius Servilius Ahala who with his own hand slew Spurius Maelius for plotting a revolution, I shall not dwell, except to say that at former epochs, in this country of ours, brave men did not lack the courage to strike down a dangerous Roman citizen more fiercely even than they struck down the bitterest of foreign foes. Moreover, we have in our hands, Catiline, a decree of the Senate that is specifically aimed against yourself, and a formidable and stern decree it is. From this body, then, the state has no lack of counsel and authority. I tell you frankly, it is we, the consuls, who are not doing our duty. [Tr. Michael Grant. Selected Political Speeches of Cicero. (Against Lucius Sergius Catilina. I. 1-3. ) Penguin Classics, 1969. Page numbers: 76, 77. ]
AFTERMATH
Catiline stormed out of the Senate meeting after the speech and left Rome to join up with his revolutionary army, which was quartered not far away. The next day, November 8, Cicero made a speech to the general population outlining the situation and trying to prevent panic. Meanwhile, the conspirators who remained in Rome after Catiline's abrupt departure on the 7th imprudently divulged their plans to some ambassadors from Gaul (modern France) who hap- pened to be in the city; apparently, the conspirators were hoping that the ambassadors would provide them with additional man- power and supplies. But instead, the Gauls reported the information to Cicero, replete with written documentation. It was precisely the break he needed!
Five of the ringleaders of the conspiracy were apprehended and detained. On December 3, Cicero delivered his third Catilinarian oration, directly to the Roman people, in which he explained the most recent developments in the case against Catiline. Two days later, the Roman Senate debated the issue; during this debate, Cicero brought forth his fourth and final oration against Catiline. The Senate voted for execution, and the sentence was carried out immediately, with Cicero's support and supervision. (Although the Senate's vote did not have the force of law, such was that body's in- fluence in Roman politics that Cicero, and others, would have felt comfortable in interpreting a senatorial decree as tantamount to legal sanction for his actions. )
For the next 20 years of his life, until he was killed in 43, Cicero looked back with pride on his role in suppressing the
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? sympathies, but Cicero gained his support by promising to help him obtain a desirable province to gov- ern after his term as consul had expired. )
the consul should have ordered:
Here, Cicero seems to be referenc- ing himself, not his colleague Hybrida. In October 63, the Senate had passed a resolution con- ferring wide-ranging powers upon the consuls for the protection of the state in an emergency. (This was the senatus consultum ultimum, often abbreviated as S. C. U. , or "final decree of the Senate," some- what similar to martial law in our own times. Such a decree empow- ered the consuls to order execu- tions of individuals deemed to pose a serious danger to the state. )
decree of the Senate: The senatus con- sultum ultimum, mentioned above. the expressions on the countenances: According to Ciceronian commen- tator Albert Harkness, Cicero is here referring to the "looks of sur- prise and indignation with which the senate received Catiline as he
took his seat . . . "
Gaius Servilius Ahala: As he himself
admits, Cicero is reaching far back into Roman history for this prec- edent: 439 BCE. Spurius Maelius was a wealthy plebeian who, at a time of famine and food shortages, was able to devote his own resources to the provision of cheap corn for his starving fellow countrymen. This altruistic action stirred suspicions among the leaders of the Roman government that Spurius was in reality trying to court popular favor, so as to position himself for a run at royal power. Accordingly, the government sent their representative Ahala to deal with Spurius, and deal
? ? ? ? ? 168
Catilinarian conspiracy as the time when he almost single- handedly saved the Roman state. But his political enemies con- demned him for his actions in this case, because he ordered the summary execution of the five men without giving them an opportunity to appeal their death sentences, as required by Roman law.
ASK YOURSELF
1. Why do you suppose Catiline showed up at this meeting of the Roman Senate when he very likely knew that his plot was going to be exposed, and that he himself might be in physical danger?
2. Cicero refers to Publius Scipio Nasica as a vir amplissimus--a very distinguished man. Can we infer from those complimentary words that Cicero approved of Nasica's actions in leading the crowd of senators who struck down Tiberius Gracchus? Would that incident be sound precedent for Cicero to push ahead for the death penalty for the five conspirators?
3. Could Catiline be aptly described as a "home-grown terror- ist"? Why or why not?
TOPICS TO CONSIDER
e Although Catiline's conspiracy certainly posed an imminent threat to the Roman government, and its leading officeholders, especially Cicero, some historians have argued that Cicero's speech against Catiline contains elements of exaggeration. Could you identify any places in the document where Cicero seems to be going a bit overboard in what he says?
e Ciceroargueddozensofcourtcasesandmadedoz- ens of public speeches during his long career as a lawyer and orator. In court, he excelled both as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney, but he was probably more sharp-tongued when on the offen- sive, as he is in the speech against Catiline. Can you find examples in the document where Cicero seems to be sarcastic? Or instances where he engages in personal attacks?
e When the Senate engaged in its momentous December 5 debate on the fate of the five cap- tured conspirators, the first 16 speakers all argued in favor of the death penalty. The 17th speaker, however, suggested that they simply be imprisoned for life, and such was his eloquence that
Homegrown Terrorism?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? he did: he killed him. Spurius's true motives, therefore, are unknown. But Cicero makes it clear what he thought Spurius was up to.
last night and the night before:
Cicero may be referring, in part, to a meeting of the conspirators in which they discussed the details of assassinating him.
Palatine: The Palatine Hill, one of Rome's famous Seven Hills, was home to some of the city's wealthiest residents, who lived in exquisite mansions; our English words "pal- ace" and "palatial" derive from Palatine. The fact that the Palatine had to be patrolled by armed guards indicates the seriousness of the situa- tion caused by Catiline's conspiracy.
Publius Cornelius Scipio: Nasica was one of the consuls in 138 BCE. A short time later, in the turbulent year of 133, when the tribune Tiberius Gracchus had proposed a highly controversial land redistribu- tion measure, Nasica was a leader of the opposition. When Gracchus announced that he would run for reelection to the tribunate--a very nontraditional decision, given that the tribunes were term-limited to one year--Nasica demanded that the consuls take action to stop him. When they refused, Nasica led a band of senators, who were equipped with clubs and heavy sticks, to one of Gracchus's cam- paign rallies, with the apparent intention of taking matters into their own hands. Things quickly turned ugly; violence broke out, and Gracchus was killed. The biog- rapher Plutarch writes that this was the first time in all of Roman his- tory that the blood of citizens was shed in a civil disturbance.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? 169
Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome
Further Information
the Senate was at least temporarily inclined to go along with that proposal. That speaker's name: Julius Caesar. There has been speculation-- although no solid proof--that Caesar was at least a covert supporter of Catiline. Could this be true? If so, what reasons might Caesar have had for backing someone like Catiline?
e Imagine that you were given the assignment of defending Catiline in court. What arguments on his behalf could you present?
e Investigate the senatus consultum ultimum (S. C. U. ), "the final decree of the Senate. " Under what kinds of circumstances in Roman history had it been invoked prior to the trial of Catiline? What would be the modern equivalent of the S. C. U. ? Are there any similarities between ancient and modern usages of a decree like this?
? ? ? ? ?
