It was not enough to prepare attacks against Cæsar’s command; the discontent of the army was also to be feared; and, in order to avert or weaken its effect, M. Marcellus caused to be further inscribed in the minutes of the Senate the following decision: “The Senate will take into consideration the situation of those soldiers of the army of Gaul whose time of service is expired, or who shall produce sufficient reasons for being restored to civil life.” C. Cœlius and C. Vibius Pansa renewed their opposition.[828]

Some senators, more impatient, demanded that they should not wait for the time fixed by M. Marcellus to decree upon this subject. Pompey interfered again as moderator, and said that they could not, without injustice, take a decision on the subject of Cæsar’s province before the Calends of March, 704, an epoch at which he should find no further inconvenience in it. “What will be done,” asked one of the senators, “if the decision of the Senate be opposed?”—“It matters little,” replied Pompey, “whether Cæsar refuses to obey this decision, or suborns people to intercede.”—“But,” said another, “if he seeks to be consul, and keep his army?”—Pompey only replied with great coolness, “If my son would beat me with a staff?...” He always, as we see, affected obscurity in his replies. The natural conclusion from this language was to raise the suspicion of secret negotiations with Cæsar, and it was believed that the latter would accept one of these two conditions, either to keep his province without soliciting the consulship, or to quit his army and return to Rome when, though absent, he should be elected consul.

The Senate declared also that, for the province of Cilicia and the eight other prætorian provinces, the governors should be chosen by lot among the prætors who had not yet had a government. Cœlius and Pansa made opposition to this decree, which left to that assembly the power of giving the provinces at its will.[829] These different measures revealed sufficiently the thoughts of the Senate, and the prudent politicians saw with uneasiness that it was seeking to precipitate events.

Discord in the interior generally paralyses all national policy on the exterior. Absorbed by the intrigues at home, the aristocratic party was sacrificing the great interests of the Republic. Cicero wrote in vain that his forces were insufficient to resist the Parthians, an invasion by whom appeared imminent: the consuls refused to occupy the Senate with his claims, because they were unwilling either to go themselves to undertake so distant a campaign, or to permit others to go in their place.[830] They were much more anxious to humble Cæsar than to avenge Crassus; and yet the public opinion, moved by the dangers with which Syria was threatened, called for an extraordinary command in the East, either for Pompey or for Cæsar.[831] Fortunately, the Parthians did not attack; Bibulus and Cicero had only to combat bands of plunderers. The latter, on the 3rd of the Ides of October, defeated a party of Cilician mountaineers near Mount Amanus. He carried their camp, besieged their fortress of Pindenissus, which he took, and his soldiers saluted him as imperator.[832] From that time he took this title in the subscription of his letters.[833]

CHAPTER IX.
EVENTS OF THE YEAR 704.

C. Claudius Marcellus and L. Æmilius Paulus, Consuls.

I. THE year 703 had been employed in intrigues with the object of overthrowing Cæsar, and the aristocratic party believed that, for the success of this sort of plot, it could reckon upon the support of the chief magistrates who were entering upon office in January, 704. Of the two consuls, C. Claudius Marcellus, nephew of the preceding consul of the same name, and L. Æmilius Paulus, the first was kinsman, but at the same time enemy, of Cæsar; the second had not yet shown his party, though report gave him the same opinions as his colleague. It was expected that, in concert with C. Scribonius Curio, whose advancement to the tribuneship was due to Pompey,[834] he would distribute the lands of Campania which had not yet been given out, the consequence of which would be that Cæsar, on his return, could no longer dispose of this property in favour of his veterans.[835] This hope was vain; for already Paulus and Curio had joined the party of the proconsul of Gaul. Well informed of the intrigues of his enemies, Cæsar had long taken care to have always at Rome a consul or tribunes devoted to his interest; in 703 he could reckon on the Consul Sulpicius and the tribunes Pansa and Cœlius; in 704, Paulus and Curio were devoted to him. If, subsequently, in 705, the two consuls were opposed to him, he had, at least on his side, that year, the tribunes Mark Antony and Q. Cassius.

Curio is called by Velleius Paterculus the wittiest of rogues;[836] but as long as this tribune remained faithful to the cause of the Senate, Cicero honoured him with his esteem, and paid the greatest compliments to his character and his high qualities.[837] Curio had acquired authority by his eloquence, and by the numbers of his clients. His father had been the declared enemy of Cæsar, against whom he had written a book,[838] and uttered many jokes, cutting or coarse, which were repeated in Rome.[839] Inheriting these feelings, Curio had long pursued the conqueror of Gaul with his sarcasms; but nobody forgot insults so easily as Cæsar, and, as he appreciated the political importance of this dangerous adversary, he spared nothing to gain him to his interests.

From his earliest youth, Curio had been bound by close intimacy to Mark Antony. Both ruined by debts, they had led together the most dissolute lives; their friendship had never changed.[840] The relationship of Mark Antony with the Julia family,[841] his connection with Gabinius, and, above all, his military conduct in Egypt, had gained for him the respect of Cæsar to whom he withdrew when Gabinius was put on his trial.[842] Cæsar employed him first as lieutenant, and afterwards, in 701, chose him as quæstor. His kindness for Mark Antony probably contributed to soften Curio’s temper; his liberality did the rest. He had given him, if we can believe Appian, more than 1,500 talents.[843] It is true that, at the same time, he bought equally dear the Consul L. Æmilius Paulus, without requiring more than his neutrality.[844] We can hardly understand how Cæsar, while he was paying his army, could support such sacrifices, and meet, at the same time, so many other expenses. To increase by his largesses the number of his partisans in Rome;[845] to cause to be built in the Narbonnese theatres and monuments; near Aricia, in Italy, a magnificent villa;[846] to send rich presents to distant towns—such were his burthens. How, to meet them, could he draw money enough from a province exhausted by eight years’ war? The immensity of his resources is explained by the circumstance that, independently of the tributes paid by the vanquished, which amounted, for Gaul, to 40,000,000 sestertii a year (more than 7,500,000 francs) [£300,000], the sale of prisoners to Roman traders produced enormous sums. Cicero informs us that he gained 12,000,000 sestertii from the captives sold after the unimportant siege of Pindenissus. If we suppose that their number amounted to 12,000, this sum would represent 1,000 sestertii a head. Now, in spite of Cæsar’s generosity in often restoring the captives to the conquered peoples, or in making gifts of them to his soldiers, as was the case after the siege of Alesia, we may admit that 500,000 Gauls, Germans, or Britons were sold as slaves during the eight years of the war in Gaul, which must have produced a sum of about 500,000,000 sestertii, or about 95,000,000 francs [£3,800,000]. It was thus Roman money, given by the slave-dealers, which formed the greatest part of the booty, in the same manner as in modern times, when, in distant expeditions, the European nations take possession of the foreign custom-houses to pay the costs of the war, it is still European money which forms the advance for the costs.

The reconciliation of Curio with Cæsar was at first kept secret; but, whether in order to contrive a pretext for changing his party, the new tribune had moved laws which had no chance of being adopted, or because he felt offended at the rejection of his propositions, towards the beginning of the year 704 he declared for Cæsar, or, which was the same thing, as Cœlius said, he ranged himself on the side of the people. Whatever might be the motive of his conduct, the following are the circumstances in the sequel of which his attitude became modified. He had proposed the intercalation of a month in the current year, in order, probably, to retard the period for the decision of the question which agitated the Senate and the town.[847] His character of pontiff rendered his motion perfectly legal: in spite of its incontestable utility,[848] it was ill received. He expected this, but he appeared to take the matter to heart, and to look upon the Senate’s refusal as an offence. From that moment he began a systematic opposition.[849] Towards the same time he presented two laws, one concerning the alimentation of the people, with which he proposed to charge the ædiles;[850] the other, on the repair of the roads, of which he asked for the direction during five years.[851] He seems to have intended to make the travellers pay according to the number and nature of their means of transport; or, in a word, to establish a tax upon the rich, and thus increase his popularity.[852] These last two projects were as ill received as the first, and this double check completed his reconciliation with those against whom he had hitherto contended.