in your handwriting; and I was highly delighted at the care and attention it showed. First you say that you disagree with Dicaearchus.[15] Now, though I was exceedingly anxious, and that with your approval, not to stay in my province more than a year, it was not my own efforts that gained the point. For you should know that no word was ever said in the House about any of us provincial governors outstaying the term of our appointment; so that now I am not to be blamed even for making a shorter stay in my province than was perhaps to my advantage. But "all for the best" is an apt saying, as it is in this case. For, if peace can be patched up, or the loyalists can be made to win the victory, I should be sorry not to assist or at any rate have a hand in the matter. But, if the loyalists are conquered, I should share their defeat wherever I were. So my speedy return ought not to cost me any regret. If this idea of a triumph that you approve had not come into my head, you would find me not far short of the ideal statesman I sketched in the sixth volume.[16] What would you have me do, you devourer of those books of mine? Even now I will not hesitate to throw away my great ambition, if that course is better. One cannot of course play both parts at once, the selfish candidate for triumph and the independent politician. But doubt not that I shall take honesty to be my best policy. As for your point that it were better for me, whether for my private safety, or for the public welfare, that I should retain my command, we will talk it over together. It is a matter for deliberation,
[15] Cf. II, 16, where Dicaearchus is mentioned as an advocate of an active life. He was a pupil of Aristotle, and wrote philosophical and geographical works.
[16] Of the De Republica.
tibi adsentior. De animo autem meo erga rem publicam bene facis quod non dubitas, et illud probe indicas, nequaquam satis pro meis officiis, pro ipsius in alios effusione illum in me liberalem fuisse, eiusque rei causam vere explicas, et eis, quae de Fabio Caninioque acta scribis, valde consentiunt. Quae si secus essent, totumque se ille in me profudisset, tamen illa, quam scribis, custos urbis me praeclarae inscriptionis memorem esse cogeret, nec mihi concederet, ut imitarer Volcacium aut Servium, quibus tu es contentus, sed aliquid nos vellet nobis dignum et sentire et defendere. Quod quidem agerem, si liceret, alio modo, ac nunc agendum est.
De sua potentia dimicant homines hoc tempore periculo civitatis. Nam, si res publica defenditur, cur ea consule isto ipso defensa non est? cur ego, in cuius causa rei publicae salus consistebat, defensus postero anno non sum? cur imperium illi aut cur illo modo prorogatum est? cur tanto opere pugnatum est, ut de eius absentis ratione habenda decem tribuni pl. ferrent? His ille rebus ita convaluit, ut nunc in uno civi spes ad resistendum sit; qui mallem tantas ei vires non dedisset quam nunc tam valenti resisteret,
though I agree with you in the main. You do well not to doubt my attitude towards politics: and you judge rightly that Caesar has not been liberal to me considering my services, and considering his lavishness towards others. You explain his reasons rightly: I am in the same boat with Fabius and Caninius,[17] as your letter shows. But if things were otherwise and he had been profuse in his generosity towards me, nevertheless the goddess you mention, the guardian of the city, would have compelled me to remember her fine inscription, and would not allow me to imitate Volcacius or Servius,[18] with whom you are content, but would wish me to express and maintain a policy worthy of my name. And I should have done it, if I could, in a different way from the way I must adopt now.
[17] Legati of Caesar: but nothing is known of any slight on them.