We are very fortunate in possessing for this period records of quite
unusual fulness and variety. The last century of the Roman republic was
rich in notable men, with some of whom we are especially familiar. In
literary importance and in permanent charm of personality, no one of
them can compare with the country squire’s son, Marcus Tullius Cicero,
who achieved the impossible in his lifetime, and attained posthumous
fame far beyond his wildest dreams. He was consul of Rome in the very
year in which Jerusalem was captured, and was in the throes of the same
political uncertainty that marked his whole later career. The most
brilliant pleader in the city or the world, he was feared, loved, and
hated for his mordant wit, his torrential fluency of speech, and his
remarkable power and skill in invective. Although his personal instincts
had always inclined him to the gentlemanly aristocracy that made up the
majority of the senate, he had won his first successes in politics on
the other side, and reached the summit of his ambition, the consulship,
as a popular candidate, receiving the support of the senate only because
he was deemed the least dangerous of three.
In the year 59 B.C.E. Cicero, concededly the leader of the Roman bar and
still more concededly the social lion of the day, undertook the defense
of Lucius Valerius Flaccus, former governor of Asia, who was charged
with maladministration and oppression. The counts in the indictment were
numerous. Among them was the following allegation: That Flaccus as
praetor had seized certain sacred funds; to wit, the moneys which
Asiatic provincials, Jews in origin, had, in accordance with ancient
custom, collected and were about to transfer to the temple at Jerusalem.
By so doing Flaccus had doubled embezzlement upon sacrilege, for the
sanctity of the temple was established by its antiquity, and confirmed
by the conduct of Pompey, who had ostentatiously spared it and its
appurtenances.
It will be necessary to examine in some detail the circumstances of the
entire case. Flaccus was a member of the reactionary wing of the
senatorial party, which until recently had held Cicero aloof as an
upstart provincial. His birth and training were those of an aristocrat.
A certain portion of Cicero’s defense is occupied in descanting on the
glories of the Valerian house, to which Flaccus belonged. The
prosecution of Flaccus, again, was a political move of the popular
opposition, now at last, after the futile essays of Lepidus and
Catiline, finding voice and hand in the consummate skill of Gaius Julius
Caesar.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account