Dio's Rome, Volume 3: An Historical Narrative Originally Composed in Greek During The Reigns of Septimius Severus, Geta and Caracalla, Macrinus, Elagabalus and Alexander Severus: and Now Presented in English FormCassius Dio Cocceianus
History
Dio's Rome, Volume 3: An Historical Narrative Originally Composed in Greek During The Reigns of Septimius Severus, Geta and Caracalla, Macrinus, Elagabalus and Alexander Severus: and Now Presented in English Form
Cassius Dio Cocceianus
Rome -- History
[-15-] "So in these charges this remarkable orator is convicted of
violently contradicting himself and, by Jupiter, again in the following
statements. At one time he says that Antony took part in everything
that was done by Caesar and by this means became more than any one else
responsible for all our internal evils, and again he charges him with
cowardice, reproaching him with not having shared in any other exploits
than those performed in Thessaly. And he makes a complaint against him to
the effect that he restored some of the exiles and finds fault with him
because he did not secure the recall of his uncle; as if any one believes
that he would not have restored him first of all, if he had been able to
recall whomsoever he pleased, since there was no grievance on either side
between them, as this speaker himself knows. Indeed, though he told many
wretched lies about Antony, he did not dare to say anything of that kind.
But he is utterly reckless about letting slip anything that comes to his
tongue's end, as if it were mere breath.
[-16-] "Why should one follow this line of refutation further? Turning
now to the fact that he goes about with such a tragic air, and has but
this moment said in the course of his remarks that Antony rendered the
sight of the master of the horse most oppressive by using everywhere
and under all circumstances the sword, the purple, the lictors, and the
soldiers at once, let him tell me clearly how and in what respect we have
been wronged by this. He will have no statement to make; for if he had
had, he would have sputtered it out before anything else. Quite the
reverse of his charge is true. Those who were quarreling at that time
and causing all the trouble were Trebellius and Dolabella: Antony did no
wrong and was active in every way in our behalf, so much so that he was
entrusted by us with guarding the city against those very men, and not
only did this remarkable orator not oppose it (he was there) but even
approved it. Else let him show what syllable he uttered on seeing the
licentious and accursed fellow (to quote from his abuse), besides doing
nothing that the occasion required, securing also so great authority from
you. He will have nothing to show. So it looks as if not a word of what
he now shouts aloud was ventured at that time by this great and patriotic
orator, who is everywhere and always saying and repeating: 'I alone am
contending for freedom, I alone speak freely for the democracy; I cannot
be restrained by favor of friends or fear of enemies from looking out for
your advantage; I, even if it should be my lot to die in speaking in your
behalf, will perish very gladly.' And his silence was very natural, for
it occurred to him to reflect that Antony possessed the lictors and the
purple-bordered vesture in accordance with the customs of our ancestors
in regard to masters of horse, and that he was using the sword and the
soldiers perforce against the rebels. For what most excessive outrages
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account