[366] Because they would not be protected as the previous tribunes were by the fact of the Clodian law (which alone was contravened) having emanated from their own collegium.
[367] L. Quadratus Ninnius, tribune-elect. On the 1st of June next he brought forward the question of Cicero's restoration in the senate.
[368] Cicero's cousin, C. Visellius Varro, a learned jurisconsult (Brut. § 264; 1 Verr. § 71).
[369] The tribunes came into office on the 10th of December, nearly three weeks before the consuls, prætors, etc., who entered office on the 1st of January.
[370] Either the libera legatio or the acting legatio in Gaul, both of which Cæsar offered him.
[371] The phrase ornare provincias, ornare consules, etc., means the vote in the senate deciding the number of troops, amount of money, and other outfit that the magistrates going to their provinces were to have. The provinces to be taken by outgoing consuls were decided before the elections—in this case they were Cilicia and Spain. But the ornatio usually took place after the consuls had entered on their office, i.e., after the 1st of January. For this year, however—we don't know why—it had taken place before the 1st of December, B.C. 58. The result of this would be that the new tribunes for B.C. 57—entering on their office 10th December, B.C. 58—would have no voice in the matter, and would thus lose a great hold on the consuls. Most of these tribunes were supporters of Cicero, while he was doubtful as to one of the consuls—Q. Cæcilius Metellus Nepos. He thinks, therefore, that his cause has lost by this measure, for the tribunes will have less power of putting force on the consuls to do anything for him, and yet the same power of stopping them should they wish to do anything of their own accord. Besides, the new tribunes may be alienated by what they may think a measure derogatory to their position. These fears came to nothing; the tribunes were loyal to Cicero, and the consul Piso forwarded his recall.
[372] Because the tribunes could have vetoed any measure brought before the people, and so could have forced the consuls to come to terms.
[373] I.e., that the senate would pass no decree prior to one recalling Cicero.
[374] There is no indication in the letter as to where Atticus is. He left Rome late in B.C. 58, and apparently did not return till after Cicero's recall. The most natural explanation is that he was in Epirus, or somewhere in Greece, and that he had visited Cicero at Dyrrachium on his way. I do not quite see how this should be thought impossible in view of the last sentence of [LXXXV] or the [next letter]. Cicero asks Atticus to join him, but he might do so whether Atticus were at Buthrotum, or Rome, or anywhere else.
[375] On 1st January, B.C. 57, P. Lentulus brought the case of Cicero before the senate. The prevailing opinion was that his interdictio having been illegal, the senate could quash it. But Pompey, for the sake of security, recommended a lex. One of the tribunes, without actually vetoing the senatus consultum, demanded a night for consideration. The question was again debated in succeeding meetings of the senate, but on the 25th was not decided. Technically an auctoritas was a decree that had been vetoed by a tribune, and Cicero (pro Sest. § 74) implies that such a veto had been put in, and at any rate the noctis postulatio was equivalent to a veto.