[154] In Appian’s account (3, 29-30, 39) Antony is said to have been in need of Octavian’s assistance in order to procure the exchange of provinces.
[155] A lacuna here intervenes, so that the account of the actual reconciliation is wanting. Appian, 3, 29-30, 39, agrees in the main with Nicolaus; Antony is influenced by his military tribunes, former soldiers of Caesar. In Dio 45, 8 Octavian and Antony are said to have made mutual concessions. According to Plutarch, Ant., 16, Antony became apprehensive on finding that Octavian had joined forces with his more powerful foes, among whom was Cicero.
30.[156] For a commentary on the swing of public opinion from Antony to Octavian, see App. 3; 12, 21, 23, 24, 29; Dio 45, 8; Plut., Ant., 16. R. Duttlinger, op. cit., pp. 77-78, directs attention to the fact that Appian presents Antony in a fairer light in this connection than do Nicolaus, Dio, or Plutarch, thus indicating a probable diversity of sources.
[157] On the authority of the ‘lex de permutatione provinciarum’ of June 1-2, 44 B.C. W. Sternkopf, Hermes 47, p. 357 ff. and Ciceros ausgewählte Reden, vol. 8, p. 9 and note, declares that this act is identical with the ‘lex tribunicia de provinciis,’ both having been ratified at the same meeting. The former term is employed by Livy, Epit., 117; the latter by Cicero, Phil., 5, 7. The combined result was that Antony should have part or all of Gaul in place of Macedonia, and that both consuls should enjoy an imperium extended for five years. In the historians the references to the exchange of provinces are: Dio 45; 9, 20, 25; 46; 23, 24; Appian 3; 27, 29, 30, 31, 37, 38, 52, 55, 63.
[158] Antony left Rome October 9: ‘Antonius autem ... a.d. VII Id. Oct. Brundisium erat profectus’ (Cic., Fam., 12, 23, 2). Also App. 3, 40.
[159] This is the only occurrence of the spelling ‘Atia’ in the excerpt. Elsewhere the name is given ‘Antia’.
[160] Appian 3, 39, and Plutarch, Ant., 16, both seem to discredit the report that Octavian made an attempt against Antony’s life, though they do not endeavor to deny it so vigorously as does Nicolaus. Suetonius, Aug. 10; Velleius 2, 60, and Seneca, de Clem., 1, 9, 1, all indicate that the attempt was really made. Cicero, Fam., 12, 23, 2, both believes and approves of it, though it is possible that he was carried away by his own desire rather than that he weighed conclusive contemporaneous evidence. He remarks, however, that the populace did not believe it, and that Antony never gave a report on the prisoners he was supposed to have seized. In Phil. 3, 19, he goes so far as to take upon himself the credit for having urged Octavian to the deed. The circumstantial refutation of Nicolaus comes doubtless from Augustus’ memoirs.
31.[161] Lacuna. Octavian’s exploit in securing enlistments in Campania is referred to by the following: App. 3; 40, 58; Dio 45; 12, 38; Suet., Aug., 10; Vell. 2, 61; Plut., Ant., 16; Cic. 44; Tac., Ann., 1, 10; Cic., Phil., 3, 3; 4, 3; 5, 23, 44. Nicolaus is unique in stating that Octavian first approached the Seventh and Eighth Legions. Both of these were composed of veterans (Cic., Phil., 14, 27; CIL 10, 4786). Beside the fact that Octavian offered an inducement toward enlisting to the extent of 500 denarii ($80) to each man, the veterans were glad to aid him oppose Antony because of a new colony established by the latter near Casilinum (Cic., Phil., 2, 100-102) which served to make Antony unpopular with the Caesarian veterans who had a prior claim to the ground. (M. Cary, Journal of Philology, 70, pp. 174-190, treats of the land legislation of Caesar in regard to Campania. He is of the opinion that Casilinum and Calatia, being settled by veterans of the Civil War, must have been founded under a later statute than the ‘lex Campana’ of 59 B.C.) Octavian’s levy was not authorized; it was therefore a revolutionary measure. Nicolaus takes pains to show that Octavian reached his decision only after Antony proved that he was destined upon war. In this Nicolaus apparently makes a good case: Antony left for Brundisium on October 9, and Octavian is represented as forming his decision and departing for Campania a few days later. Confirmation comes from Cicero, who on November 2 wrote significantly to Atticus (16, 8), ‘On the afternoon of the first I had a letter from Octavian. He is making a great undertaking. The veterans at Casilinum and Calatia he has won over to his side. Nor is this strange; he gives 500 denarii apiece. Evidently he means to wage war with Antony. And so I see that in a few days we shall be in arms. But whom are we to follow? Consider his name and his age.’
[162] Q. Juventius and M. Modialius are unknown. L. Maecenas is incorrectly written for C. Maecenas, of whom this seems to be the earliest mention. M. Agrippa had been a companion of Octavian at Apollonia. ‘Lucius’ may be L. Cocceius Nerva, great-grandfather of the emperor Nerva. He is mentioned as a trusted friend of Octavian in 41, and thence throughout his life.
[163] The several references to his mother could only have come from Augustus’ own memoirs.