Cicero's Speech Pro Rabirio Postumo

352 Pages·2001·1.587 MB·English

by  Mary Siani-Davies

Oxford Scholarly Editions Online
DEDICATION
Mary Siani-Davies (ed.), Clarendon Ancient History Series: Marcus Tullius Cicero: Pro Rabirio
Postumo
Published in print: 2001 Published online: January 2017
...........................................................................................................................
pg v
For Peter
...........................................................................................................................
pg vi
Page 1 of 1
Oxford Scholarly Editions Online
PREFACE
Mary Siani-Davies (ed.), Clarendon Ancient History Series: Marcus Tullius Cicero: Pro Rabirio
Postumo
Published in print: 2001 Published online: January 2017
...........................................................................................................................
PG VII
PREFACE
When I first met Professor Alan Douglas at the University of Birmingham, little did I know
that I would come out of his office with a task the fulfilment of which was to occupy several
years of my life. After discussing and then discarding a number of ideas, Alan suggested
that a commentary on Pro Rabirio Postumo would make a worthwhile project, especially as
this Ciceronian speech had previously been somewhat neglected by scholars and had never
been the subject of an English-language commentary. It was not long before I realized some
of the reasons for this neglect. Not only was the text highly corrupt but also the legal and
political background of the case was particularly complex. Cicero is deliberately evasive in
Pro Rabirio Postumo, as his decision to argue Postumus' case on legal technicalities hides
more than it reveals about the delicate 'Egyptian Question' which lies at its heart.
To help explain the complexities behind the speech this book includes a substantial
Introduction. This explores in detail relations between Ptolemy Auletes and the Romans, the
legal procedure—Pro Rabirio Postumo is the only extant trial involving the use of the clause
of the Julian law of extortion 'What has become of the money'—and the life of Gaius Rabirius
Postumus, who is revealed to have been not a peripheral figure but an important actor in his
own right on the stage of Late Republican politics. The Commentary that follows is mostly
concerned with history but, when it is thought appropriate, some discussion of a linguistic,
literary, and textual nature is also included. The translated passages in the Commentary are
from the Loeb editions, unless otherwise stated, and all Ciceronian references are given in
italics. Throughout, I have followed the Harvard (author-date) system of references, with a
full Bibliography provided at the end of the book.
To make the speech readily accessible to both students and scholars a new translation in
English is also included, the first since that published by Loeb in 1931. The translation was
produced in the sweltering heat of a small and cramped apartment in Bucharest, but I have
tried throughout to pitch the English at the level of Cicero's rhetoric, whilst avoiding over-
indulgence in linguistic niceties. The translation is based on Clark's text M. Tulli Ciceronis
Page 1 of 3
...........................................................................................................................
pg viii
Orationes (Oxford, 1909), mainly because it offers the least emended text, closest to the
original manuscript. In the few instances where my translation is semantically different from
the text established by Clark I append a discussion in the Commentary.
There are several people whom I would like to thank for their continuous encouragement,
expert advice, and genuine interest in the subject of this book. Professor Alan Douglas was
not only the inspiration behind this work but also found the time to read my translation
critically and offer his expertise generously on the stylistic particularities of Ciceronian
oratory. The late John M. Carter, who supervised the commentary as a Ph.D. thesis, played
an enormous part in guiding me through the historical complexities of the speech. His
friendship and scholarship have left an indelible mark on this work. Although I tried not to
persecute Professor Herwig Maehler with too many queries about the Egyptian side of the
speech, he spent time patiently explaining to me the idiosyncratic nature of the Ptolemies
and their political system. Professor Barrie Hall was more than happy to discuss the textual
complexities of the speech and made some pertinent suggestions, which contributed to the
understanding of several key points. Professor Susanna Morton Braund also found the time
to read the translation of the speech and made several valuable suggestions that improved
the general tenor of the translation. Her enthusiasm and lively approach to scholarship
are truly infectious. Professor Silvia Rizzo took the time to decipher and elucidate illegible
ligatures and readings of the text in the margins of photostats of the original manuscript.
Corresponding with Professor John Crook made me realize that there are few concrete
answers when it comes to the intricacies of the Roman legal system. Professor Andrew
Lintott kindly read sections of the Commentary and offered constructive criticism of my
analysis of the penalties under the Julian law for extortion and, more specifically, on its
clause 'What has become of the money'. Dr Duncan Cloud made jargon-free suggestions on
the legal technicalities of the speech and took time to meet me and discuss them in person.
I am also grateful to Professor Heikki Solin and Professor Olli Salomies for their advice on
issues of nomenclature and particularly Professor Salomies, who provided me with a copy of
an important inscription which otherwise would have escaped my attention. Professor Gian
Luca Gregori also notified me of the existence of an, as yet, unpublished inscription, equally
...........................................................................................................................
pg ix
important for unravelling the onomastic complexities of Postumus' family name. Professor
Carla Balconi was kind enough to send me a copy of her article on a recently discovered
papyrus relating to Postumus' activities as the royal treasurer in Egypt, well in advance
of its actual publication. Dr Andrew Drummond took the time and care to answer queries
regarding Roman political offices. Gunter Kowa was frequently pestered to translate
passages written in antiquated German, a process that tested not only his English but, at
times, even our friendship. The staff of the library of the Institute of Classical Studies in
London, and in particular Paul Jackson and Sue Willetts, have tirelessly answered my queries
Page 2 of 3
and facilitated my endless search for lost references. This book has greatly benefited from
Paul's encyclopaedic knowledge of old and new publications and Sue's expertise in computer
packages. Professor Chris Carey displayed enough faith in my work to recommend it for
publication to the Oxford University Press. For this, I wholeheartedly thank him. The editors
of the series, above all Dr Miriam Griffin, have been lavish in their time and expert advice,
and I owe a deep debt to them for their guidance and constant vigilance—although I am, of
course, fully responsible for any errors which remain. I am also grateful to Ms Hilary O'Shea,
who has successfully co-ordinated the whole project from beginning to end. The research
for this book would not have been possible without the financial support of two institutions:
the Athens Academy, which offered me a grant for four years, and the British Council, which
financed my travel abroad. Finally, I would like to thank my mother for her unconditional love
and constant support, and, most of all, my husband Peter, who watched over me so that I
came out unscathed at the end of the tunnel. To him I dedicate this book.
August 1999
M.S.-D.
...........................................................................................................................
pg x
Page 3 of 3
Oxford Scholarly Editions Online
ABBREVIATIONS
Mary Siani-Davies (ed.), Clarendon Ancient History Series: Marcus Tullius Cicero: Pro Rabirio
Postumo
Published in print: 2001 Published online: January 2017
...........................................................................................................................
PG XIII
ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviations of ancient authors and modern journals generally follow those used by The
3
Oxford Classical Dictionary (1996), L'Année philologique (Paris, 1924–), and E. W. Gray
(ed.), Sources for Roman History, 133–70 B.C.: Collected and Arranged by A. H. J. Greenidge
and A. M. Clay, 2nd edn. (Oxford, 1986).
AE L'Année épigraphique (Paris, 1889–).
BGU Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Museen
zu Berlin. Griechische Urkunden (Berlin,
1895–).
Broughton. Supplement T. R. S. Broughton, Supplement to the
Magistrates of the Roman Republic
(Atlanta, Ga., 1986).
CAH The Cambridge Ancient History IX
(1994).
CIL T. Mommsen et al. (eds.), Corpus
Inscriptionum Latinarum (Berlin, 1863–).
FIRA S. Riccobono et al. (eds.), Fontes Iuris
Romani Anteiustiniani, 3 vols. (Florence,
1940–3).
FGrH F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der
griechischen Historiker (Berlin and
Leiden. 1923–).
ILLRP A. Degrassi (ed.), Inscriptiones Latinae
Liberae Rei Publicae, 2 vols. (Florence,
1957–63).
Page 1 of 2
ILS H. Dessau (ed.), Inscriptiones Latinae
Selectae, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1892–16).
K-St R. Kühner and C. Stegmann, Ausführliche
Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache, 3rd
edn. (Leverkusen, 1955).
lex rep. Lex de rebus repetundis.
MRR T. R. S. Broughton and M. L. Patterson,
The Magistrates of the Roman Republic,
2 vols. New York. 1951–2).
OGIS W. Dittenberger (ed.), Orientis Graeci
Inscriptiones Selectae, 2 vols. (Leipzig.
1903–5).
OLD P. G. W. Glare (ed.), Oxford Latin
Dictionary (1968–82).
PP W. Peremans and E. Van't Dack (comps.),
Prosopographia Ptolemaica, 7 vols.
(Louvain, 1950–81).
.........................................................................................................................
pg xiv
RE A. Pauly, G. Wissowa, and W. Kroll (ed.),
Real-Encyclopädie der klassischen
Altertumswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1893–
1980).
SB F. Preisigke, F. Bilabel, and E. Kiessling,
Sammelbuch griechischer Urkunden aus
Ägypten (Strassburg, 1915–).
SEG Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum
(Leiden, 1923–).
ThLL Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (Leipzig,
1900–).
Page 2 of 2
Oxford Scholarly Editions Online
INTRODUCTION
Mary Siani-Davies (ed.), Clarendon Ancient History Series: Marcus Tullius Cicero: Pro Rabirio
Postumo
Published in print: 2001 Published online: January 2017
...........................................................................................................................
PG 1
INTRODUCTION
1. PTOLEMY XII AULETES AND THE ROMANS
The Ciceronian speech Pro Rabirio Postumo is primarily concerned with the 'Egyptian
question' which reverberated throughout Roman politics in the mid-fifties. Engaging all
the key figures in contemporary Roman political life, this was to occasion furious debate
in the Senate and lead to a Roman army marching into Alexandria, before it ended in a
1
series of high-profile court cases, the last of which was the trial of Gaius Rabirius Postumus.
The King of Egypt at the time was Ptolemy XII Auletes. Within the speech, Cicero paints
a highly negative picture of a 'capricious and untrustworthy' monarch, who appeared as
2
an importunate beggar before the Roman people. Cicero's caustic words have frequently
found reflection in the works of historians. In the past they have tended to present the King
as a weak ruler devoid of the talents and insight of a true statesman, who, in the latter
years of his reign, was little more than a hapless marionette pulled by the strings of Roman
3
masters. Yet, Cicero's rhetoric in Pro Rabirio Postumo was never intended to be a historical
record. It was primarily determined by the requirements of the occasion and, in particular,
the need to win the case in question. Knowing full well the hostility the jury felt towards the
Egyptian monarch, Cicero panders to their prejudices at the beginning of the speech so that
he can virtually ignore the King during the remainder of the proceedings. The assumption
apparently was that by rapidly dispensing with the King at the outset he could distance his
client from the ill-starred monarch.
The negative image of Ptolemy Auletes formed by previous historians is largely derived from
the ancient sources, which generally
...........................................................................................................................
pg 2
present the King as an incidental character in their broader chronicle of the rise of Rome as a
political and military power. From their Romanocentric vantage point most pay little attention
Page 1 of 91
to the decisive influence internal social conditions in Egypt, particularly in Alexandria,
had on shaping the King's policies towards the Romans. However, recently a number of
historians have begun to re-evaluate the existing evidence and, by taking into account
papyrological findings, they have succeeded in offering a revised and more sympathetic
4
image of the King. This Introduction seeks to advance further this revisionist line by
suggesting that Ptolemy Auletes was not so much a pawn of the Romans as a determined
ruler struggling against considerable odds to maintain his hold on the Egyptian throne both
for himself and his heirs. In the face of internal weakness and the growth of a self-confident
and expansionist Rome, the tying of his fortunes to his powerful northern Mediterranean
neighbours was a conscious decision made in the hope of rendering himself immune from
both internal and external challenge.
Relations between the kingdom of Egypt and the Roman Republic before the reign of
Ptolemy Auletes can best be characterized as sporadic but generally good. The geographical
distance between Egypt and Italy and the lack of any contiguous territory meant there
were no obvious points of conflict. The initiative for the establishment of amicitia had been
taken by the Egyptians in 273 when, under Ptolemy II Philadelphus, an embassy had been
5
dispatched to Rome bearing gifts and pledges of friendship. As Rome lacked diplomatic
links with any of the countries of the East at that time, the opportunity to establish friendly
relations was welcomed and drew a comparable gesture of high diplomacy, with envoys
6
being sent to Alexandria. Subsequently, although relations between the two countries
remained generally amicable, the Egyptians seem to have been wary of becoming too
deeply entangled in Roman ventures. For instance, in 87/86 they failed to
...........................................................................................................................
pg 3
respond to L. Licinius Lucullus' appeal for ships to fight Mithridates and, instead, dispatched
7
presents to try and appease their northern Mediterranean friends.
However, whilst officially the Egyptians may have adopted a policy of studied neutrality
towards the Romans, the arrival on Italian shores of Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II in 164, after
he had been exiled by his brother Ptolemy VI Philometor, set a precedent for the aggrieved
party in dynastic conflicts within the Ptolemaic court to turn to the Romans for support in
8
pressing their claims. The presence of these important Ptolemaic exiles in Italy was to
provide the opportunity for recurrent Roman meddling in Egyptian affairs. Indeed, when
Ptolemy Auletes' immediate predecessor Ptolemy XI Alexander II fled to Rome before the
advancing Mithridates in 83, Sulla became directly involved in his affairs and allegedly
sponsored his return. Alexander II eventually returned to Alexandria in 80 and, on arrival,
he promptly put to death his queen Cleopatra Berenice III, who had usurped his position
during his absence. In response, after the new monarch had ruled for a mere nineteen
days, the Alexandrian mob extracted its revenge by murdering him in the gymnasium,
Page 2 of 91
incensed not only by the death of their queen but also, perhaps, by Sulla's involvement
9
in the whole affair. During his stay in Italy, Alexander II was said to have drawn up a
testament bequeathing Egypt to Rome, although from Cicero's account it seems that nobody
10
ever saw the document. If the will did exist it seems most likely that it was the product of
a private transaction between Sulla and Alexander II. Indeed, the fact that the will was never
published might strengthen the supposition that it was not only an 'insurance policy' for the
Egyptian King, as was usually the
...........................................................................................................................
pg 4
case in such bequests, but also a reward, perhaps extorted under some pressure, for the
young King's 'benefactor' Sulla. Earlier, in 96, Alexander II's predecessor Ptolemy Apion,
at a time of dispute with his half-brother Soter II over the possession of Cyrene, had also
bequeathed that province to the Romans, primarily, it seems, as a device to stave off any
threat of assassination, and now the two wills were to remain Damoclean swords suspended
11
over the Egyptian lands which the Romans could wield as they saw fit.
When Ptolemy XII Theos Philopator Philadelphos Neos Dionysos, graced by his
contemporaries with the epithet Auletes (the flute player), ascended the throne in
Alexandria on 12 September 80, his right of succession was far from assured. According
to eastern practices no greater precondition for legitimacy of rule existed than proper
descent ('iure gentis et cognationis'), but by the time of Ptolemy Auletes the blood lines of
the Ptolemaic dynasty were becoming increasingly diluted and some sources even suggest
12
that his mother was not of royal stock but a concubine. The new King's right to rule was
quickly contested by Cleopatra V Selene, who other sources suggest may have been his
actual mother. At any rate, she sought to advance the claims of her other children, and in 75
even journeyed to Rome in order to plead before the Senate the case of two of her sons, who
were said to be of 'undoubted' Ptolemaic provenance and, hence, prospective claimants to
the throne of Egypt. According to Cicero, Cleopatra Selene's claims drew little response from
the Senate, other than a judgement that, as her sons were fathered by Antiochus Eusebes of
13
Syria, they did have full rights to that kingdom. Although this decision can be seen as an
indication of the general reluctance of Rome to become actively involved in Egyptian affairs,
the Romans
...........................................................................................................................
pg 5
by and large do seem to have considered Ptolemy Auletes to have been the legitimate King
ο‎f Egypt. In fact most of the ancient sources accept that Ptolemy Auletes was not the son of
a concubine but the legitimate offspring of Ptolemy IX Lathyros and Cleopatra Selene, the
brother of Cleopatra Berenice III, who was the daughter of Lathyros and Cleopatra IV, and
14
the father of Cleopatra VII, who was the last of the race of the Lagides.
Page 3 of 91
The new King weathered these imputations of bastard birth and other initial challenges to
his rule, but his hold on the throne appears to have remained precarious enough for him
to continue to make strenuous efforts further to reinforce his legitimacy, beginning with a
15
marriage to his sister Cleopatra V Tryphaena, who was of undisputed royal provenance.
Obviously, being granted the title of Pharaoh was no longer sufficient to guarantee the
loyalty of his subjects and so considerable efforts were made to win over both the Greek
and Egyptian populations. Careful attention was paid to the religious rites expected from
an Egyptian monarch and the granting of special rights and asylum privileges to various
16
temples can be seen as an attempt to conciliate further the powerful native priesthood.
The King also adopted the title 'Neos Dionysos'—Dionysos had always been considered one
of the ancestors of the Ptolemaic dynasty—to emphasize the symbolic continuity between
17
himself and his Greek ancestry from the time of Alexander the Great. It was this same
quest for additional legitimacy, perhaps coupled with a desire to demoralize his rivals, that
was to lead the King to embark on the risky strategy of seeking approbation of his rule
from the Romans through official recognition as a 'friend and ally' of Rome and the personal
endorsement of powerful individuals.
When Ptolemy Auletes ascended the throne, the old balance of power which had ensured
two centuries of peaceful coexistence
...........................................................................................................................
pg 6
between Egypt and Rome was already breaking down. For some time Egypt had been in
seemingly terminal decline, losing land in Phoenicia, Coele Syria, Thrace, Asia Minor, and the
Cyclades, and in 75 the new King was to be faced with a further loss of historic Ptolemaic
18
territory, as the Romans annexed Cyrene on the basis of Ptolemy Apion's will. The ancient
sources provide no explanations as to why the Romans delayed for so long in executing
the will, but modern historians have put forward a multiplicity of reasons ranging from a
general policy of non-annexation at the time, or the size of Cyrene being insufficient to
form a province, to the unattractiveness of having to mount a defence against marauding
19
desert tribes. Whatever the exact reason, before it would sanction the annexation of any
of the Ptolemaic lands, including Egypt, it seems that the Senate had to be certain of clear
practical gains and limited political consequences. In the case of Cyrene the practical gain
seems to have been determined by the urgent need to secure the food supply of Rome.
The new province was a corn-growing region and its annexation coincided with concerted
attempts by the Romans to improve their grain-distribution system and reduce the risk
of food shortages in the capital. Indeed, in the face of continuing instability in the area,
pressure for annexation might well have also been exerted by the publicani who lived in
20
Cyrene managing the ager publicus. The limited political consequences were assured by
Page 4 of 91