When considering Caesar's acta

I hear much mention currently about papers left behind by Gaius Julius Caesar after his death, and I hear people discussing whether or not we should follow the courses of action referred to in these papers. My personal feelings towards Caesar aside, I think it is necessary to examine the nature of these documents before any discussion of what to do with them, and this kind of examination has been lacking among the discussions on what must be done.
First, let us examine the nature of these papers. These are unofficial documents that have been “found among Caesar’s belongings,” as is said by M. Antonius. This is a point worth repeating: although Caesar enacted a great body of legislation during his tenure as dictator, these are not official resolutions of his nor were they ratified by the senate. There is not a precedent in our legal tradition for fulfilling actions referred to in documents such as these. It is not a legally binding will (though the legality and sanctity of even such a document as that has been trampled into the mud with the recent invalidation of Gaius Julius Octavianus’ will). Although the senate, while he was alive, had given him unlimited governmental authority in each area these papers discuss, these papers nevertheless leave two glaring questions in my mind: Does that authority extend beyond death? Are these papers legitimate even if it does?
Even those senators who see Caesar as a tyrant have not made any motions to rescind the entirety of his legislation as invalid because of that opinion. Such a move would be extremely foolish and would destroy any and all progress we have made over the last few years. It would throw all of our political appointments, legislative initiatives, and foreign/domestic policies into chaos. We can say that we “were coerced,” but we always had the option of speaking out against him, whatever the consequences may have been. We have therefore lost all rights to objections on those grounds. Therefore, we cannot write off these documents as invalid just because they “were written by a tryrant.”
That does not, however, mean that we cannot still write off these documents, just that it must be argued differently. Like it or not, the senate cannot deny that it gave all of Caesar’s power to him legally. We can, however, object to the legality of these documents based on the idea that the legal authority given to Caesar by this senate body ended at the same time as his life. Never before has this body enacted legislation brought forward posthumously by any of its members, whatever their position in life may have been at their time of death. Why should we do so now, even if these papers are officially sealed, formulaically written, legal proposals written by the most powerful man in the world at his death? What authority do his ashes now hold?
This brings me to my other point of dispute with these acta. Are these informal letters which oft-handedly mention some idea for future action, or are they officially sealed, formulaically written, legal proposals? If they can be reasonably objected to even if they are officially sealed, formulaically written, legal proposals, should we even consider them if they are not? Unofficial, informal letters would have had no legal bearing for Caesar even when he was alive, but were they even written by Caesar, or by M. Antonius or some other devotee of his who hoped to use some of their master’s ex-authority? Caesar often dictated much of his writing. Could his scribes not have written these in the same hand all his correspondences appear? If close examination shows that they come from an unknown hand, why should we press further? Even if they appear in the standard form, the absence of evidence for their falsification is not evidence for the absence of falsification. Therefore, we must proceed very carefully in these matters. We need not bring these documents before the senate for discussion, because they have no bearing on the senate’s course of action. No such documents ever have. But if they are brought before the senate, their history and authorship should be examined closely before their content is even considered. Let us investigate the matter (in the usual manner) among his slaves and scribes to see if any incriminating evidence comes forth. If there is evidence for falsification, then we need pursue the matter no further. If not, we still do not need to. Even if they are from the hand (or mouth) of Caesar, they hold no legal bearing for us now.
Caesar is dead. Let us consider alive what he did while he was alive and dead what appears after his death. There is no question that we must continue with our magistrates as they have been appointed. To do otherwise would be foolish and would invite chaos upon us all. Let us not, however, continue to live and direct our lives and our state under the words and ideas of a dead man, however great he may have been. I have seen all too well in the case of my brother how this can lead someone. Caesar was a great man, and he drew men of all natures towards him, captivating them with his charm and the force of his conviction. I held Caesar in the highest regard for his character and actions (not just for his assistance in funding the construction of the Basilica Paula) during his life, and I will continue to hold him in such regard in death; therefore, let me be the first to say, “Let Caesar rest. He was a god among men, and he drew us all towards him, his ideas, and his plans. Let them rest with him. His time is over. Let us remember him, but let us move on without him. We are capable enough.”
Whether we love or hate him, we can get too caught up with men such as Caesar. Even our strongest and wisest can become consumed with it, letting it fester in their minds like a disease. We need look no further than my recently departed brother for an example. Therefore, let no more of our men waste their lives following or fighting his cause. Let us pursue our own. Caesar is just one man in a long line of mankind. There have been other men like him, and there will be more like him, and cowards and sycophants will bend similarly to their wishes, following their every word. Let us not be such. We have our own destinies to achieve.

The Way Forward

Noble Senators, we come here today to discuss the acta of the late Julius Caesar. This issue has many sides, and indeed, we ought to ask ourselves several questions before we proceed:
1) Can Caesar’s acta be interpreted independent of the illegitimacy of his rule?
2) What are the costs associated with enforcing the acta?
3) What are the costs of ignoring the acta?
4) What course of action will both ensure stability and hold true to the principles of the republic?

As regards our first question, I answer that we must recognize that not all laws passed by a tyrant are tyrannical in nature. Indeed, as we see in Plato’s Gorgias, the tyrant does what he sees fit, not what he wants. If his actions are directed by right reason, then they do have the force of just law. For as we know law must be in accordance with right reason for it to obtain any binding force. Therefore, I think that it is plaint that we may hold some of Caesar’s acta to be legitimate. However, we ought to make a distinction here. Recognizing the legitimacy of a law and recognizing the legitimacy of the sovereign who enacted it are two separate things. By recognizing the legitimacy of some of Caesar’s acta, we are not offering an acceptance of the legitimacy of Caesar’s rule.

However, as we have seen from recent historic example, not all of Caesars appointments were wise. I hardly think any among us would steadfastly maintain that appointing Dolabella or the young Octavian was in the best interest of the Republic. For this reason, I believe it is clear that the cost of having a blanket endorsement of the acta by the Senate would be very high indeed. It would be rash, conscript fathers, to not give the advice and consent of the Senate to confirm each of these appointments individually. We must ensure that we do not install into power men who seek private gain over the good of the Republic. By examining each of the acta on its own merit, we shall be able to ensure the safety of the Republic, both now and in the future.

But you may say “Panaetius, do we not risk alienating those who were expecting political office if we choose to deny it them?” Yes, conscript fathers, we run that risk, but would we rather have those men with the positions of power and influence? I think not, good Senators. Indeed many noble men appointed by Caesar are good, true Romans, and they are deserving of their appointments. Doubtless the Senate will be happy to maintain these assignments. Nevertheless, there are many of Caesar’s acta that are inimical to the interests of the Republic, and to enforce these blindly would be to hand our beloved country over to slavers. Therefore I say to you, oh conscript fathers, that the cost of alienating a few undeserving aristocrats is worth it, if only to avoid a far more terrible fate.

This being said, I find that the most prudent course of action currently lies in taking each of the acta in turn and approving or disapproving of them as the Senate sees fit. I feel that by this measure, we shall be able to avoid plunging our country into chaos, and also avoid handing our beloved Republic over to criminals.

Caesar's Acta

We, the conscript fathers of the Senate and the leaders of Rome, have to confront a serious issue: the assassination of Gaius Julius Caesar, for whatever intentions good or bad, has left us in a state of bureaucratic paralysis from which we've barely recovered from. Caesar's specter continues to haunt us after his death: the specter of his leadership and procedure in the Senate. Regardless of how you felt about the man, we must all acknowledge that while he was alive, he maintained a tight control over appointments and process. Before he died, Caesar enacted a huge amount of legislation, unrivaled by any Roman in recent history, and appointed a large number of government magistrates for the following years. And now, we must confront how we are to address Caesar's Acta after his death, at a time when the Senate is lacking for leadership and its magistrates quarreling violently with each other.

Many of those magistrates still occupy the positions Caesar appointed to them—others have resigned or met a variety of unfortunate fates. Some would blame Caesar for this: it is tempting, I can assure you, to cast the blame on the ghost of a man I so vehemently opposed. But our mistakes are not Caesar's fault, and as we have followed the man's judgment even after declaring him a tyrant, I see no point to broadly reject his Acta at this point, nor do I believe it feasible in this time of crisis. Instead, I agree with my good friend Marcus Tullius, in that of Caesar's legislation that is already in effect, individual Acta must be reviewed and considered carefully before they are rejected. We have already seen some Senators, Caesar's most vehement critics and enemies, try and reject Acta across the board, only to realize a sobering truth: to the man, they owe their positions and authority to Caesar's judgment. In the end, you cannot have it both ways: indeed, Caesar has never effectively been declared a tyrant outside the Senate's own mind, simply because we cannot effectively bar his legislation's effects. What kind of Senate has no magistrates, no civil officials to run elections, indeed no Senators? Having previously served as a military commander, as many of my fellow Senators have done with distinction, does not translate automatically into a consulship or praetorship: it was the decision of a Dictator that resulted in those appointments, which are the cornerstone of Caesar's Acta.

It is a very bitter truth, and I am as frustrated as the rest of you. I myself did not owe to Gaius Julius Caesar my most crucial appointment, my year as Consul (in 50 BC). Indeed, during my Consulship, I called for him to return from Gaul, ending his governorship two years early, as all of you will remember. However, I still understand that afterwards, I served at Caesar's discretion—when he marched on Rome, Caesar knew that I'd attempted to force him to step down from command and bitterly opposed him back in Rome. I chose not to take up arms against him, unlike my brother and my nephew, and was pardoned thusly, and allowed to remain in the Senate. At any time, Caesar could have stripped me of any political power I might have had, and chose not to. While I do not regret my opposition to him, and believe it was absolutely necessary and just, I do not delude myself into thinking that I had some sort of absolute inviolable right to serve in the Senate just because of my time Consul, as though I were appointed by the Gods themselves. Politics is a dangerous game, my fellow Senators, made only more unpredictable by military might and the daggers of assassins. We need whatever stability we can get, and if Caesar's Acta can keep Rome from descending into chaos, we are in position to reject them.

Do Not Act Rashly; Act Sensibly

Senators,
Many of you label the late Julius Caesar; some of you call him a great, honored, and legitimate leader of Rome, and others, a tyrant. No matter your stance, you must admit that he was at least in some ways trying to rebuild and restore Rome after the civil war. No matter what his goals might have been (merely taking the dictatorship to really give him a chance to restore the Republic or to take advantage of the situation for complete personal gain and sole rule) he never wished Rome any harm.
Though I think it is too late to consider the acta in their entirety, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to at least look at some of them as ideas for future action in Rome. I know for one, that Caesar wanted to make Egypt a friend and ally of Rome. Though Caesar and I had an intimate relationship and this could have been his way to protect me, I think it has been made clear that such an action would be most beneficial to both Egypt and Rome. An act of selfish intentions for one may be the virtuous act of another with right ambition.
I think if the Senate cares enough about the restoration and glory of the Republic, you should all at least know what Caesar had planned. If you are wise men, you will be able to discern which of his acta were in place purely for self-gain and which will best serve the goals of the Republic.
On the topic of political appointments, it would be silly to retract every position filled under the living Caesar as it would probably send the running of the state into total chaos. Even if you wanted to hold another election, there would be no one there to run it. Since the time of his murder, the Senate has continued to recognize Caesar’s “consul designates” with out any hisses from either side. There is another example of those details of the acta which fall more on the side of helping the Republic (or at least in the eyes of the Senate).
I say don’t destroy the acta just yet. At least give them a glance even for the sake of making some good-for-the-Republic decisions more quickly.

A Poet's Thoughts on the Acta

Senators, we finally have gotten to an issue that should have been addressed weeks ago.  However, the malevolent yearning for personal power has prevented us thus far from dealing with the most important issues at hand.  Now that Dolabella, Octavius and Lepidus have met a deserving demise, and Antony awaits his, we can finally broach the subject of Julius Caesar’s acta.

            I agree with Aulus Hirtius in that I, too, am very torn about what to do about Caesar’s acta.  However, my hesitance and indecision arise not out of respect for the dead man, but out of fear of consequences.  I think that all of us can agree that complete abolition of the acta would wreak havoc on our Republic and cause absolute chaos.  Many of us owe our positions to Caesar, and would be out of power if the acta were destroyed.  Mass elections would have to be held to fill these numerous positions, and in our present state of uproar with Antony roving about, such a period of transition would leave the Republic vulnerable to attack. 

            Though abolishing the acta would put us in a most dangerous position, validating them would also have negative consequences.  It makes me shudder to think that a dead man, one known for his overindulgent vices and his obsession with power, should continue to control the workings of our noble Republic.  How foolish will we look to the people and the provinces, assassinating our tyrant in vain?  For in vain it will be, if we confirm all of his future plans for our state. 

            At this point, we have operated somewhat according to the acta by allowing many of Caesar’s political appointments.  However, we have also witnessed the errors inherent in his plan for Rome.  Caesar selected Dolabella to become consul in his stead when he departed for the Parthian Campaign later this year.  In an attempt to avoid unnecessary squabbling and untimely elections, we confirmed this designation.  We soon learned that Caesar was not the best judge of character.  I for one, was not surprised, when I heard the rumors that Dolabella was allowing Antony to bribe him.  And I was even less surprised when the Senate learned that Dolabella had betrayed the Republic and joined the reckless rogues Octavius and Lepidus in pursuit of power.  For how could a man who destroyed the Republic beyond recognition and indulged himself in contemptible luxury of all kinds be able to recognize decency in others?  Lepidus and Octavius themselves, both heirs to Caesar’s legacy, also demonstrated their depravities when they violated the Constitution and left Rome and amassed troops to undermine the power of this Senate and become the next tyrants. 

            However, due to our good luck, and the fact that some upstanding and honorable citizens do still exist in Romulus’ cesspool, some of Caesar’s designates have risen above his deplorable example.  Brutus, Caesar’s protégé and consul designate for 41, though Caesar’s continued tyranny would have assured him unending power and wealth, decided that the Republic was more important than the life of one man and liberated us from a tyrant.  Aulus Hirtius, Caesar’s consul designate for 43, has revealed his true loyalty to the Republic by forgoing his consulship for next year in order to serve us nobly in our present time of need. 

            It is evident that Caesar’s acta have thus far been neither wholly negative nor wholly successful.  We cannot destroy them, causing chaos and denying some of the honorable Senators’ their appointments, but we cannot publicly and completely confirm them, submitting still to the tyrannical yoke of the dead Caesar and ignoring his acta’s recent failures.  I propose that we continue on the same path we have begun and finish out 44 with Caesar’s appointments still standing.  However at the end of the year, as wise Piso has suggested, we should hold elections as normal and let the Romans decide their leaders for themselves.  Regarding Caesar’s plans for Rome, as much as I detest the name of that vile cinaedus, none of us can deny that some of his intentions were surprisingly wise and much-needed.  Thus, I believe these plans should be brought before the Senate for discussion, and that we proceed accordingly—judging which proposals should be carried out and which should be tossed aside.  

Acting Against the Acta

Senators, let us not pretend that there is any good in these papers of Caesar. By this point, there is little doubt in my mind that when Caesar was scribbling these papers he was touched in the head. Look at the vile monsters he dared suggest were capable of holding any position: Dolabella, that traitorous and spineless consul, Lepidus, that slippery and arrogant warmonger- his own Magister Equitum, Octavian, that upstart brat with delusions of grandeur- his heir, and finally cowardly Marc Antony, whom he left the acta with in the first place. Why have we been following this guidance? Why have we put our ears to the ground, listening to hear if a shade of a tyrant would give his approval? This is not republicanism! Every deed we follow in Caesar’s name is a deed not carried out in the name of the Senate and the People of Rome!

Some might criticize my harshness here, citing that Aulus Hirtius is certainly no Antony or Dolabella and that not every choice Caesar made was a bad one. Well, to be fair to poor departed Caesar’s memory, he had to get something right eventually. But whether one good idea outweighs four horrible appointments should not be a question! Even I doffed my insignia as praetor because it was granted to me by a tyrant, and only resumed the position at the behest of my fellow senators who wisely pointed out that to loose a praetor at such a turbulent time would be an egregious error. I do not mean to sound as though I am asking Hirtius to step down- far from it! I laud the Senate in recommending his name for election, just as I laud their recommendation of Lucius Julius Caesar. I do not praise the will of Caesar, but the will of the Senate! This august body has finally begun making its own decisions. May it continue to follow in this glorious way!

Apparently the acta also include some financial matters which have not yet been resolved as well as public works. Tell me, Senators, was Caesar the only man who proposed public works or accrued debt? Surely every man in this room has some idea as to what to do in regards to these issues, why in the name of Jupiter must we consult Caesar’s acta in order to make a decision? I have no doubt that many Senators may consult the acta for guidance, and with that I have no complaint. It is the duty of the Senate to consider many means to reach an end and advice the magistrates accordingly. It is not, however, the duty of the Senate to further glorify a tyrant by acting only as he would direct. He should have been thrown into the Tiber- then we could have called him a tyrant formally from the beginning and disregarded simpering Dolabella and put in his place a more worthy candidate for the consulship; we could have dealt more readily with brazen Lepidus and his overgrown hubris; we could have denied Octavian the right to his adoptive father’s funds and kept him under our control; and we could have kept Antony in check. Instead we were awed by his lingering specter and bent over backwards according to the will of a dead man. No more, Senators! I say this Senate needs to start thinking for itself!

On the Acta
My fellow senators, we have been through many a trying issue lately. First with Lepidus, Dolabella, and young Caesar marching on Rome, and now with Marcus Antonius trying to convince me to lead troops against Rome before he was exposed as an enemy to the Republic and fled the city. Despite their horrible actions do not let the deeds of these men cloud your judgment about what needs to be done with Caesar’s acta. It is regrettable that these men decided to claim they were acting in Caesar’s interests when Caesar’s first love and duty was always to the Republic and the Roman people, while those men were obviously only out to strengthen their own power. Perhaps at first they meant well, but power had corrupted them beyond sense when they decided to march on Rome. Any man who truly believed as Caesar did would have never started events that could have torn Rome asunder.
The facts are that many Senators hold the positions they do now because they were appointed by Caesar. If we deny the entirety of the acta then all of his appointments will be called into question which would simply cause more chaos. Even Brutus was given his position by Caesar, which was arguably a mistake, but that is now in the past. In fact some senators would not be alive or in Rome if it was not for Caesar’s clemency. Denying Caesar’s acta because you did not agree with all of his actions in the field, or the actions of his minions such as Marcus Antonius is no reason to declare his actions null and void. One of his actions was to give Aulus Hirtius as consul designate, as we have seen by his fair actions since we ratified him as consul this was not a bad choice. Some of his other intentions for Rome were the building of public works that would benefit the people that he cared for so much.
Should we not restore temples, build and repair aqueducts and roads across the city and improve life for the people? Most importantly we now have the money to being these projects with the property confiscated from the traitors. If see no more fitting revenge than to use their property to build up the Republic which they would have seen torn down. If the fact that Octavianus intended his property to be distributed amongst the people of Rome is found out then the people will not react well. If we preemptively use the money for the people they are less likely to be angry with the senate. I do not suggest this out of fear, but wish only to present the facts as they have occurred in the past. After so recently making moves to protect and unify the city I do not wish to see the people angry with this wise body.
It is undeniable that there are now holes in the acta with the death of Brutus and Hirtius relinquishing his appointment for next year. Still there are many valid points in the acta. We are finally making progress as a senate in unifying our actions and moving back to the Republic that Caesar held so dear and those of us who would truly honor his memory wish to return to.

Regarding Caesar's Acta

Conscript fathers, the issue at hand seems quite simple to me. The question has been phrased in terms of supporting or denying the late, great Gaius Julius Caesar, but to me, this choice of words merely contributes to the problem. To set out the question itself as a battle between two sides does little more than create even more strife and disharmony than possibly necessary. I propose, gentlemen, that we disregard the fact that Caesar has chosen these men and simple judge each issue based on merit. Why must we approve or disapprove of the entire body of work as a whole, deciding such a vast number of decisions in one fell swoop? As painful and time-consuming as it may be, I think that the best possible solution is to judge each and every candidate based on merit, not on allegiance with or against Caesar.
While I’m well aware that Caesar appointed several outstanding Senators to future positions, many of whom deserve such opportunities and would more than likely serve the Republic respectably, a handful of Caesar’s benefactors have obviously turned out to be a painful and detrimental danger to our society. These men, so closely associated with Caesar during his life, obviously never should have been in charge of the Senate or given any power or responsibility whatsoever. The same may not necessarily be said for every single one of Caesar’s other appointments or mandates. While I’m all for caution and even a fair amount of skepticism regarding Caesar’s political leaders, we cannot allow the horrendous events of the last several weeks to force us into any rash, unnecessarily paranoid decisions on who should lead our Republic in the future. We cannot allow a handful of poor leaders – Lepidus, Octavianus, Dollabella, Antony – to spoil the chances for the handful of great leaders that may be on our horizon, regardless of whether or not Caesar approved of them or not.
Take, for instance, one of our current interim consuls, Aulus Hirtius, who has spent the last several weeks meticulously and painstakingly attempting everything he could to maintain a moderate stance and to direct the course of action of the Senate towards a livable compromise, even as so many here in the Senate made sure everyone knew they disapproved of his common sense and level-headedness. Now, this individual was appointed by Caesar and has since won over your approval to serve as temporary co-leader; in the interest of moderation, he has even opted to step down for the next election. My point is this, Senators, that Caesar appointed good politicians and crooked ones. We can’t assume anything, especially not that just being approved of by Caesar makes you a corrupt political, a repulsive traitor, or a threat to our future.
So, gentlemen, I repeat my proposal: for each individual, let us take into account, not their allegiances or relations to Gaius Julius Caesar, but instead their merit, their past actions, their loyalty to the Republic, their military glory, their words here in the Senate. For each specific foreign policy and each particular legislative initiative, let us consider not the source or the author, but instead the advantages and disadvantages of each measure within our current state of affairs. Caesar’s entire acta is unnecessary and dangerous to take up all at once; we must go on carefully, cautiously bearing mind the steps we have taken to get to where we are and where we would like for the Republic to be. Keep in mind, sirs, that after all that we have been through in the last several weeks – indeed for the last few generations – we still have several years of recovery ahead of us; marches on Rome and internal strife have not buried us entirely, and so we have reason to keep going, reason to be sure that Rome as we know it will live on, under the protection of our own appointees and our own legislative measures. We control our future now, gentlemen. Let’s not screw it up.

Compromise for the sake of the Republic

Fellow senators, I come before you a senator burdened. It is no secret that I have nothing but the deepest loathing for Caesar's tyranny. Were this the only fact weighing on my decision concerning the acta, my answer would be simple: burn the words of the filthy tyrant. However, as you all know, I do have great respect for Caesar and his victories as a military commander throughout his career. Unfortunately, he ceased to have my respect when he crossed the Rubicon. So, dear senators, I think you can see my dilemma.

To enact Caesar's acta in their entirety is out of the question, nay impossible. They call for already two appointments that cannot be filled. This would also effectively send the message to the people that we, the senate, condone Caesar's behavior in its entirety, which is not true of all of us. So thus blanket enacting the acta is not an option.

As of late, we have become a unified senate (with the exception of the fleeing coward and perhaps those who were close to that pathetic excuse for a triumvirate) and I do not wish to see that end. There are those among us who, for whatever reason, fully supported Caesar in all his actions. There are many senators wiser than I, yet they too disagree on this subject. Wise Hirtius, whom I clearly support and respect, as was shown by my recent actions, is still a faithful supporter of Caesar. Also wise beyond his fellows, my dear friend Cicero, who shares my distaste for Caesar's actions as dictator. Who, I ask you, is right? Even better, who can determine who is correct?

Regardless of this matter, we must also face the fact that we have been abiding by the acta in choosing Dolabella and now Aulus Hirtius as consuls. I will not lie to you senators, it was the knowledge that Hirtius was consul designate that led to initial consideration of him. That being said, his position of consul designate was by no means the deciding factor. I have not forgotten Caesar's support of Dolabella as consul suffectus, of Lepidus as Magister Equitum, and of Octavius as his heir and future Magister Equitum. Counting Hirtius's worthy actions, this makes Caesar's record 1-3. He's chosen one good man out of four. Fortunately for him, his military record was better. But this cannot be ignored. Surely had Caesar been alive, he would not have continued to support these men if he were in our positions. Caesar is dead and therefore can no longer give an accurate judgment of character.

For these reasons, I feel that we must compromise for the sake of the Republic. Let the acta be read out of respect for Caesar the general and his supporters. However, let them serve only as a suggestion. This gives Caesar no more power than that of an ordinary senator yet does not disgrace his name either. The acta should not become official legislation unless the senate feels the need to enact one specific aspect at a time. Under no circumstances should we have one blanket vote to enact all the acta. If we wish to move onto public works, we can consult the acta. Those who support Caesar's recommendation can vote in favor of what he stated in the acta. Those who disagree can propose something else. Caesar has been wrong too many times already in the judgment of men. I fear that he might be wrong in other areas as well. Despite the legacy he tried to leave, Caesar was only a man. He can not be afforded in death the same power he forcefully took in life. He should be allowed no more than a recommendation. Even this is perhaps far too generous. Is noble Brutus allowed to make a recommendation? No, he is not. But I feel that we should not create rifts in our recovering Republic. This is all my conscience will allow me to concede.

Caesar's acta; honorably put to rest

Fellow senators, it has come to our notice that we must decide once and for all what to do with Caesar's acta. Many of us in this senate loved Caesar and indeed, many of us owe him our careers and our lives. Caesar was a great man who saw the potential in people and was able to place them in the best possible position for the betterment of Rome itself. He had the keen ability to see past personal opinion into a man's very being.

Many people would argue that because of his great wisdom we should continue to follow the wishes of Caesar. They might say that those of us in power in the senate are in fact there mainly due to the foresight of Caesar. Should we not continue down the line that he has set us on? I do not believe so. I believe that now that great Caesar is no longer among us we should once again return to the true republic that we are and should have positions filled as they have been in the past through vote as opposed to appointment.

Much has changed since the death of Caesar. We have seen treachery, war, and trying times. Who is to say that even Caesar would not find it necessary to take these things into account when deciding the future of Rome. Perhaps he would choose differently due to these tumultuous times. We cannot say for certain and that adds to why I believe that we should not follow Caesar's acta. Things in Rome have changed and the people have changed as well. We should give them the chance to choose their new leaders as they see fit. Also, how can the consul who is serving now then serve again after he has sworn it shall not be so? Let the people make their own choices and trust in them to choose wisely.

I understand that abolishing the acta may cause problems for certain citizens and certain senators. However, I believe that as Romans they will be able to see beyond their own personal agendas and be able to picture the better action for the whole of the state. We have accomplished much in the past few days, least of which a mild truce amongst the senate and a unity almost unheard of in its senators. Any problems that arise from the abolition of the acta can be dealt with as long as we continue to put aside our differences and focus on the matters at hand. Let us end these petty men and their dishonorable actions against Rome in the name of great Caesar. Let us put a stop to their political schemings all while hiding behind the legacy of a man who would be shamed to his core for being associated with men of such disgrace. Any senators who have issue with a decision not to follow the acta should consider if they are outraged out of deviotion to Caesar and a trust in his decisions, or if they have more personal reasons behind their thoughts.

Caesar helped to shape the Rome in which we live. As I have said and as we all know, many of us are in positions of power and esteem in thanks to him. He trusted us with his most beloved country, trusted in us to make wise and just decisions for the people of Rome. Would he not also now trust in us to make the best decision for the future of Rome? I believe that Caesar himself would want us to follow our own wisdom and honor in this matter and not let our judgement be clouded by blind devotion, political pride, or dishonorable intentions.

We should not be completly blind to the wise wishes of Caesar and yet we should leave the present to the living while respectfully honoring the past and the dead.

Acta Caesaris

Distinguished senators, at last we bring to the Senate floor the issue of the belated Caesar’s acta. I respected Caesar as an honorable character and trusted him with the hand of my daughter in marriage. I am deeply regretful that he is no longer with us; however, the Republic must unite to conquer the many plagues that have arisen by those who wished to further their own personal agenda and career.

I am aware of the former speculation that the marriage of Caesar to Calpurnia helped lead to my being elected consul in 58. While I am sure that all of you find this accusation blasphemous, I capped my political career as censor and now I am of senior rank in the Senate. The acta therefore cannot benefit me personally. Most unfortunately, several cherished friends of Caesar have recently used the acta to justify their own self-interest. They foolishly marched on Rome in an effort to advance the legacy of Caesar. Senators, I am sure you are all in agreement that dead men cannot effectively control the future of our beloved Rome. Caesar may have written an agenda for the years to come, but would likely alter plans in the event of changes in the characters of selected men.

Thus far, the Senate has obliged the acta by allowing Dolabella to become consul rather than submitting to re-elections. Obviously this was not a wise choice. Some of you may point out that I recommended the noble Aulus Hirtius since he is consul designate for 43. I was not simply following the acta, Senators, but rather recommending a moderate and epicure who, like me, wants reconciliation. I believe that similar men are the best remedy for the Republic. His willingness to sacrifice his consulship in 43 for the immediate concerns of the Republic displays a true Roman and alludes to the potential dispositions of other chosen men of Caesar.

The acta has several holes which cannot be carried out. The consul designate for 43 has already filled the position. Marcus Junius Brutus is consul designate for 41, but has recently been assassinated. Remember that Caesar ruled as a consul himself, only allowing a replacement if he was away from Rome, such as in the case of Dolabella. The Senate must keep its tradition of having two consuls.

I know many Caesarians will argue that Rome may fall into disarray with the abolition of the acta. I myself would hate to see further chaos, social unrest, and potential economic ruin. Therefore, I propose that the acta be maintained for the remainder of 44 so that the Senate can effectively control the situation with Marcus Antonius without the distraction of other internal affairs. After 44, elections for two consuls and the remaining magistrate positions should be reinstated. Any particular problems concerning economic and social problems should be brought before and voted on in the Senate. Let us continue the glory of Rome in the Senate, and privately support the memory of Caesar.

I leave you, conscript fathers, with words of advice to my fellow colleague and senior Senator Marcus Tullius Cicero, who recently surprised us all with the adoption of the bastard child of Cleopatra and, supposedly, Caesar: with all respect to the memory of my son-in-law, perhaps it would be wise to teach Marcus Ptolemy to avoid flaunting the obvious adultery in which Caesar so often engaged.

Much Ado About the Acta

The senate has had to face many hard choices since the death of the tyrant Gaius Julius Caesar. With the exception of Brutus’ death and the delay of action against Lepidus, the senate has made great advances in getting Rome back to her republican roots. Gaius Julius Caesar’s death was a blessing. The event helped the power hungry see that personal power is temporary, but the republican ideals which this city was founded on are perpetual.

If Caesar was assassinated as the leader of a barbarian tribe, he would be forgotten and his body probably desecrated. Rome is not a city of barbarians and Caesar’s final requests cannot be ignored. Caesar’s acta must at least be considered if for no other reason than because the extreme power he held before his death. A tyrant’s will is a will nonetheless; and as a civil society we should consider whether to allow these requests to be burned, honored in full, or considered in part.
If we honor Caesar’s will in full, Caesar’s authority will be confirmed even after death, which will negate all of our accomplishments since his death. Ambition is a vice that can easily consume the minds of the weak. Ambition can corrupt any person, no matter how little their political clout may seem to be. If the senate allows Caesar’s acta to be ratified in full, the people of Rome will have to live in fear of another tyrant rising to power. Often is it through the powerful that newcomers gain their own influence. Surely Caesar had this in mind while making some of his appointments. The other thing he had in mind was to appoint people into offices who he knew would never oppose his whims and radical policies. Since Caesar’s life was not entirely free from corruption, what guarantee do we have that he did not intend to harm the republic even after his death with his will?

Caesar’s acta do contain orders concerning the financial matters of the people as well as of the city, though, which cannot be ignored. Debts need to be settled and the city needs to have a firm grasp on its own financial situation; but a dead man has no concern in these matters. A dead man, even one whose influence exceeded all others during his life, necessarily forfeits this influence upon death. Consider for a moment, how Rome would be viewed by the outside world if the senate allowed it to be ruled by not just by a dead man, but a dead tyrant! How preposterous it is to even consider ratifying the acta in full when the senate has clearly been in favor of returning to republican, not monarchical ideals.

Supporters of Caesar, and there are many among the senate, will argue that Caesar’s will is mostly responsible for all of our positions in the senate. This is partially true, but we must always remember that he is the one that brought the republic to the brink of destruction. Caesar did not devote his entire life to destroying the republic, so we will not spend the rest of ours denying that he did the state some degree of good in the beginning. For this reason his acta must be considered in discreet parts. Parts concerning military appointments must be discussed in the senate first, for obvious reasons. Parts concerning financial matters must be second, since financial chaos can destroy a city as easily as a tyrant. There is no logic in admitting or denying the will as a whole. As Caesar’s life attests, perhaps not all parts of the acta are misguided. It is up to the senate to decide which parts of the acta are folly and which parts may actually benefit the republic.

Caesar's Acta

The acta of Caesar should not be read in this senate or in any other part of the Roman Empire. Caesar is now gone and he has been so for quite some time, so we must move on without his help. If we are to truly take control and run Rome as it should be run, we must take responsibility for ourselves. We must not rely on Caesar to keep running things from his grave. We are supposedly wise men (some men wiser than others), so we must use our own wisdom to run this government. The acta is the will of Caesar, and although I was a friend of Caesar, I believe that his time has gone and that we must get on with life without Caesar. I am a man of action, so I do not believe that we should stand by idly without putting effort into running things. This means that even if we must get down into the dirt with the plebs to make sure that our actions are just and right, then that is what we must do. We must take it upon our own shoulders now and pave our own path to the future, for if we rely on others to do our work for us, we will accomplish nothing. By using the acta of Caesar to decide our appointments to office and the running of our foreign policy, we are handcuffing ourselves to the past. I believe that the past has many uses, it is useful to learn from past mistakes, to learn strategy and wisdom from the past helps us to make the future, however I do not believe that we should allow the past to run the present. We must take present matters into our own hands and guide the present into the future that we desire. These matters may sometimes be a heavy burden, but we must prevail and carry on no matter how heavy the burden becomes. I once said that I would give my life for Rome, and I still stand by that assertion. I bear the burden of office gladly because I believe that my wisdom may help better Rome. I fear the day when I am no longer useful and am only a burden upon the Roman people, on that day I will step aside and hope that a better man will receive my position. However, until that day I will not back down from any of my responsibilities and I would hope all of you would feel the same. This is why I believe we must not read the acta of Caesar. I hope that my fellow senators take pride in their duty and are more than willing to stand up for what they believe in no matter who it means opposing. It is often hardest to oppose one’s friends, and that is the only difficulty for me in opposing Caesar’s acta. However, to oppose the will of one who has passed on is not the same as opposition in life. There is no way for Caesar to present his argument on why he has appointed these men or why he believes certain policies should be enacted now. If he were still alive today, perhaps he would not make the same choices. These were Caesar’s beliefs as of a month ago, and if we allow the acta to be enforced, we may be making choices that are post dated. Thus, I believe that the senate should help shape the future and decide all of the matters that now present themselves to us. We can keep moving toward a better tomorrow if we all join together and try to make it so. Who could fault us if we give our best for the sake of Rome? However, if we think only of ourselves and what we have to gain from Caesar’s appointments, then I am sorry to call myself a senator. I have the courage to stand against the acta and all who support it. Now the question is, do you?

Who controls Caesar's Legacy?

It has become a dire need, conscript fathers, for us to speak about Caesar’s legacy.  The Senate must determine how history will remember Caesar, and how his actions shall be defended or denigrated.  It is my hope that we can come to an Ultimate and Unanimous resolution to this question.

            In the past month, Marcus Lepidus and Gaius Octavianus both attempted to use their connections with Caesar’s Legacy for personal gain.  I worry that Marcus Antonius sought to do the same with Caesar’s Acta.  If we do not provide the people guidance in this matter, fathers, then we will be allowing other legacy-hunters the use of Caesar’s name to stir dissension among our ranks.  We must, as a united group, state firmly and finally how Caesar’s life shall be remembered by all true Romans.

            (As I write this, word has been brought to me that Antony too, not having learned from the criminal, the brat and the traitor, claims Caesar’s legacy as his own.  In this letter he has contradicted everything read on Wednesday, and shows just how deeply he venerates the Republic and its laws, by seeking to destroy them.)

            The question of Caesar’s legacy takes on added weight for me personally, as I prepare to teach young Marcus Ptolemy about his father.  What actions of Caesar’s shall he be taught to emulate, and which to avoid?  For, as in every man’s life, some of Caesar’s actions can be judged right and appropriate, while other actions must be censored as destructive and harmful.

            Lepidus, Octavianus, Dolabella and M. Antonius were heirs to Caesar’s legacy, as am I and the rest of the Senate who has remained loyal to the Republic.  Consider whose actions have been judged traitorous to the State, and whose actions have helped preserve it.  That both the legacy of saving, and that of threatening the Republic have come from one man indicate that contradictions existed within Caesar’s life.   We, Conscript Fathers, must disparage those actions which we have prosecuted in others, and praise those actions which we extol when found in ourselves.  Likewise we must prosecute those actions of Caesar’s which lead to the treason of Lepidus, Octavianus, Dolabella and Antonius, and yet commend those actions of his which lead to the expansion of Roman power and prestige. 

            How does civil war advance Roman might, when Roman seizes Roman property, and Roman slaughters Roman life?  How can ANY MAN who chooses to march on Rome argue that he holds the Republic foremost in his heart?  How can any true Roman seek the death of another Roman, simply for his own profit?  Likewise, how can any True Roman allow an enemy of Rome to live, when the State will be more secure with that man’s death?   Such were Caesar’s actions when he left Gaul, under the advice of Antony, and it is such a legacy that Antony follows now.   We cannot praise the actions of a man who disparages the authority and power of the Senate, trusting rather in his own deceptions and lies.

            We can only commend those actions of Caesar, or indeed of any Roman, that increase Rome’s majesty without loss of honor, property, or life of another Roman.  No majesty is gained when a Roman suffers involuntary harm; Roman honor only increases when ALL Romans are able to profit from the actions taken.  Unfortunately, recent men have sought profit for themselves at the expense of their fellow Roman.  Under such conditions, it is necessary for the safety of the greatest number to be protected from the machinations of thieves and murderers.  The Senate cannot approve any action that does not hold the Republic’s safety at it’s core.

            This same guideline must govern our actions concerning Caesar’s Acta.  If we fully deny the power of Caesar’s Acta, then we will also invalidate the right of many of our own members to hold the magistracies which allow them to guide the Republic toward safety and prosperity.  Such an action invites chaos, as the senate must question by what right anyone may hold power.  If, on the other hand, we recognize that Caesar’s Acta should be fully enacted, all our actions since the last Ides must be questioned.  What if the Acta speak positively of M.Lepidus, C. Octavianus, or P. Dolabella?  What if the Acta recommend that M. Antonius be invested with additional honors beyond those of the Consulship, whose powers he has manipulated to be advantageous to himself?  The Republic has suffered too much during the time between the Acta’s dictation and the current day.  Caesar could not have spoken thoughtfully of the situations which we have faced since his death.  The Acta speak of a Republic that Caesar envisioned, not the one which exists.

The Senate must be allowed to judge the Acta not as a single set of suggestions, but as individual actum from a man with an incomplete understanding of Rome’s current political situation.  We must be given the power to oversee which Actum will increase the glory of our State, which will incur harm, and which no longer have any bearing.

Rise Above, Honored Senators

Honored senators, I must confess that I am torn on the subject of Caesar’s acta. I respected and admired the man, and, whatever things may have been said, I believe he was a wise and ultimately just leader. Therefore, as an ally of Caesar and as one of his former generals, I feel as though I must abide by his acta, since I believe that they were written with the best of intentions and with careful consideration. As a proud Caesarian, there could be no desire further from my heart than to dishonor his name and invalidate his works by denouncing the acta.

At the same time, my desire to honor a leader I admired so much places me in a difficult situation. Although I have given up my claim to the next year’s consulship in order to serve the Republic in its current string of crises as consul suffectus, it is undeniably true that I have benefited from Caesar’s acta even more now than I benefited from Caesar’s favor as one of his generals. This being true, I fear it may seem tremendously partisan and self-serving of me to remain in support of the acta, yet I am hopeful, conscript fathers, that you will see past this shallow interpretation in order to hear the truth of my words.

The state, while it has been set on its way towards recovery due to the courageous acts of its citizens and senators, remains in a state of instability and danger. At this time, Marcus Antonius still runs about the countryside attempting to gather aid for his final and, I think we would all agree nearly inevitable, assault on Rome. Thus we must sensibly retain, rather than foolishly and hastily discard, the available and, more importantly, stable governmental plan that has been left for us.

I dearly wish that I could state this unequivocally, but such is not the case. As it stands now, the staunchest and most powerful proponents of Gaius Julius Caesar have all betrayed the Republic. Indeed, all but one of these men is dead. Thus those men whom I would ordinarily hope would be the most viable advocates for the worth of the acta have done nothing more than besmirch the names of Caesar and all who associated with him. In this current climate of mistrust and betrayal, I cannot allow myself to believe for even a moment that I am free from all suspicion, despite the fact that I have always tried to stand only for what I believed to be right and beneficial to the state.

Further issues have arisen in the form of Brutus’ demise. Between the death of the consul designate for 41 and the fact that I have renounced my claim to the consulship for next year, a great many holes have begun to appear in the acta. What shall be done for next year? Will elections be held for only one consul? And it is unlikely that these problems will be the only ones to emerge. As we move further and further into the future, it is inevitable that more and more problems will become apparent.

And so you see, gentlemen, that I have found myself in a difficult situation. The acta are now incomplete with regard to their appointments, and yet I am loath to discard them completely due to the implications it will have for the memory of a man I respected. In addition, it is only Caesar’s appointments that have demonstrated the problems thus far; his provisions for foreign policy, internal affairs, and legislation remain unchanged and undamaged. While it may be impossible for us to simply pick and choose which aspects of the acta we wish to utilize, neither should we abandon the entire body of work because of a few surmountable problems related to only one aspect. Thus, I urge you to renounce what partisanship you might feel toward the acta and well and truly look at the provisions within it. Study them. Let your hearts and minds undertstand that the acta is less the legacy of Ceasar than it is the course which will lead Rome into its glorious future.

Address to the Legions

Noble Legions,

Men! You all know the place our great general died. Word must have reached you of how Marcus Junius Brutus and his gang of senators bit into our commander so many times with their betrayal and daggers in the senate house. How they accepted his clemency and prosperity, then turned on him in frenzy. I, so woefully waylaid by the betrayer’s own cousin, Decimus Junius Brutus could not reach them in time. I felt the bitterness most severe of losing him so close, falling just short of arriving to his aid.

After his death the assassins regrouped with their allies to celebrate their vile victory. I feared even for my own life at the time, but soon found them seemingly sated with one man, for the time being. Betrayed though I was, though you were, though all of Rome was from the murder of Caesar; I thought it best to wait and eventually bring the senate to bear against his killers rather than strike prematurely and fail. I foolishly fought by the rules of the city rather than the field, with litigations and legislation in stead of spears and swords. I sought carefully to maintain order and dignity in that city. I remained at least to ensure Caesar’s funeral games. I waited there to bring the country slowly back to the course of Caesar’s act and spirit. I waited in fain, the day never came that I could further his administration and will.

Though the people remained loyal to Caesar in the streets the senator’s malevolence spread in the senate. This began with their refusal to persecute M.J. Brutus. The enfeebled senators cravenly craved only to escape a bloody fate, caring nothing for Rome nor virtue. They chose to hide their vengeance in shame. I wrestled still with the doddering old men, but with time their fatigue disease spread among the senate and through conniving wickedness the republicans furthered their insidious corruption of the state. With such an epidemic of insolence little progress dragged on.

They blocked my movements, threw up filibusters and stretched issues before the floor. Many of you felt the effects of this as well - the lands owed to you for your service still wait unclaimed and undesignated. You waited to rot in idleness while old men sharpened their tongues and whispered slant lies to further their desires. When finally you received commanders again some of you received a man who merely waited for the time to stretch away, others a mere boy, both failed against me when I marshaled the senate’s armies. Though the situation grew ever darker, my allies still remained, and I protected the city for them and right. Even after I defended the city, the city betrayed me. The corruption in the senate reached a new height in my own betrayal, by none other than my own brother. The venom dripping from the liars’ fangs dripped down into his ear and he lied and betrayed me for his own advancement.

It was I finally saw that the senate is diseased beyond healing. Like a limb beyond it must be severed lest it infect all of Rome. There are a few senators who still remain loyal to the strength of Rome, embodied in her lands, her glory, her armies! They who helped me escape an unjust imprisonment, they who finally retaliated against M.J. Brutus, they who refuse to accept those deceivers and manipulators who have seized the senate. These men are worthy of running Rome, but our enemies have stolen the magistrate’s authority. All these worthy men are allies against those who win authority through womanish tricks. The thieves of power now accuse me of manly pleasures, manly actions, manly ways. They know that I partake in the same joys of a soldier’s life, the men I have fought beside in so many campaigns. I have fought with from Hispania to Macedonia, from Egypt to Gaul, all across the empire for Caesar, for glory, for my due.

Now Caesar is dead at the hand of those men he offered friendship, those men I tried to govern. I his closest general and you his veterans and troops lack the man who drove us across the land in brilliant victory. So close to securing a country, he was struck by deception in his own city. I will not make the same error as Caesar, I survived my dealings with those vipers and their betrayal through the foolishness of my assailants and the strength of my allies. I have grown wise those men’s their treachery. I now offer to take up your contract where Caesar left off. Fight for me and we can reclaim Rome. There is much land in the hands of fools and cowards - follow me and we can take back our city, take back our land, take back our country!

Like composer, like acta. LET THEM BURN!

In light of this recent recovery of our former tyrant’s acta, my suggestion for action in the senate is simple: burn it all, and burn it well.

In the past several weeks, this most noble republic has demonstrated that there is no room for tyranny. Julius Caesar attempted and failed; Marcus Antonious attempted and failed; Marcus Lepidus, Gaius Julius Caesar, and Publius Cornelius Dolabella attempted collectively to overcome the Republic and also failed; To withstand such attempts and still produce a functioning and (somewhat) unified senate is an enormous accomplishment. These things having been brought forward, I do not understand why there is even any consideration for approving Caesar’s acta. To approve of and distribute the acta accordingly would declare the Republic’s loyalty to a tyrant’s deeds, even when he is dead! Noble senators, must I remind you that there was a reason that that imperial ox was put down?

To the Caesarian party, I understand your loyalty to Caesar. I too was subject to Caesar’s charms and gifts while under his military command. However, I snapped out of the spell he placed on us and saw him for the true tyrannical, egotistical maniac he really was! Some of you fear that abolition of the acta would lead to chaos throughout the empire. My response to that is with what this great empire has witnessed here in the past few weeks (liberation of Rome, take-over by Marcus Antonious, march on Rome by a wretched and self-proclaimed triumvirate, and the assassination of Rome’s liberator himself), I think it to be in the best interest of the people that we condemn the acta to the same fate as its composer. Even if by pure insanity we support the tyrant’s obsolete requests, the floodgates will open for future tyrants who can easily claim power or advancement of their personal agendas, just by pointing to Caesar’s documents. For once, Caesarians I ask you to put aside your personal agendas for the safety and well-being of the Republic, just as noble Brutus once did.

Furthermore, in no way does my disapproval of Caesar’s acta advance my personal ambitions in this senate. The reason I am so adamantly against advocating the acta is because I firmly believed and still do believe that he was a tyrannical criminal, who had the utmost disregard for the Republic and what it stands for. It would be extremely hypocritical of the senate to accept Caesar’s acta because it would declare our loyalty to a dead tyrant’s requests. Logically, if his acta are taken into effect, then Caesar’s tyrannical system is still in effect. To accept would erase any success this senate has had in the past several weeks, and would send us back to square one: what to do about Caesar. He was a criminal, a tyrant, and an oppressor; therefore his last requests should be viewed as tyrannical; it is that simple, conscript fathers.

Also, with the recent and sudden (and extremely unexpected!) assassination of Brutus himself, accepting Caesar’s acta would be a spit on most noble Brutus’ grave. He was commended for his self-less act of putting an end to Caesar’s tyranical romp, and then cursed by Postumus’ knife. If the acta were to be accepted, wise senators, then it would appear to the people of our esteemed empire that Caesar was murdered for no reason. This, I assure you, cannot be the case. So let us put an end to Caesar’s tyrannical ways once and for all. Let the acta burn to death under the same fate as its composer!

Letter from Marcus Antonius to the Senate

Marcus Antonius to the senate and people of Rome,

Greetings from, well, wouldn’t you like to know where! I am sure that by now you have all learned of my flight from an unjust and unconstitutional imprisonment. Those of you who have conspired against me will have received this news with grimaces on your bloated senatorial faces, but those of you who still support me and stand firm on the side of the right will have rejoiced on hearing of my escape. I am writing this letter to explain and justify my action. I hope all of you will listen attentively, as this letter contains information of the utmost significance.

I need not recall to your minds my distinguished ancestry, which stems ultimately from the god Herakles, nor my distinguished service in the past on behalf of our noble republic. I need not recount all of my valiant military exploits in Palestine, Egypt, Gaul, Spain, Greece, and Italy herself, mater nostra. What I want most to remind you of is my recent conduct in the senate. I was entrusted with the acta of Caesar by his wife, Calpurnia, yet I have refrained from using them to prevent more unnecessary conflict in the senate, even though I would just be enacting the will of Caesar. More to the point, who was it who deposed the cowardly Lepidus from his position as magister equitum? Marcus Antonius. Who was it who then accepted a colleague you all appointed in the consulship in order to restore the republic to its former dignity? Marcus Antonius. Who was it who opposed the traitorous Lepidus, Octavian, and Dolabella in their impious march on Rome? Marcus Antonius. What fault, then, chickpea gallery, what fault can you find with these actions? What charge can you level against me when you observe without bias my conduct in the senate over the past weeks? Are my actions the sort of actions that should be rewarded with an unjust imprisonment? No, these are the actions of a patriotic Roman, someone who puts the interests of the republic before his own, someone who upholds the duty of his position and with every action supports the senate.

“But,” you may respond, “when the tribunes opposed you in the senate they read letters that surely incriminate you, don’t they?” Yes, those two tribunes, the illustrious Lucius Caesetius Flavus and the trustworthy Lucius Antonius, traitor to his own kin. I refer to them now only as the Gracchi brothers, since their actions will ultimately be as much or more detrimental to our state than those of Tiberius and Gracchus. Yes, the Gracchi did read letters in the senate that supposedly came from my own hand, with my own seal. But do you trust these men? What a shameful lot of timorous morons you are if you do! Did you not notice that they usurped the floor not only from, the consul, but also from the praetor, who by all rights should have taken over when I stepped down? Those two pieces of tribunician scum took control of the senate? Gentlemen, am I the last Roman, or does anyone else see the ignominy of this course of action? And you would trust these wretches? You would trust Lucius Antonius, a man who betrayed his own brother?!?! Dwell on this for a moment, gentlemen. How reliable is Lucius Antonius, or Gaius as I now refer to him? What more shameful action is there than the betrayal of one’s nearest relative? I would rank Lucius’ crime above that of Brutus, who only killed his benefactor. Lucius betrayed his own brother, and yet you all let this illegitimate (how else can account for his action?) lowlife take charge of the senate? And as for Lucius Caesetius, or Tiberius as I call him, confess to yourselves how much you love that prickly bastard.

“But they read letters.” Yes, they read letters. And I am sure that the outstanding character of these two true Romans guarantees the authenticity of those letters. Did it ever occur to any of you that, since I trusted my brother with a brother’s trust, that is, wholeheartedly, I suspected nothing when he borrowed my seal and even on occasion let him sign letters in my name? How do you think Tiberius and Gaius came by those letters, then? I happen to know, because I too have a letter, this one delivered to me by a trustworthy senator. It is a letter, one of the many that I have in my possession, from the traitor Gaius to his brother in deception:

(To Lucius Caesetius Flavus )

Hey, I’ve finished thinking about your proposition and I think you’re right. If you can assure me at least praetorship then I’ll support you against marcus. I’d also go for a tribune with consular powers if you still think that is easier to do. We need to keep my situation a secret for as long as possible. I can pass you information, but I don’t have any evidence against him yet. If it comes down to it we can always just make up as much as we need.

Marie
(Lucius Antonius)

Who can doubt that this comes from the hand of Lucius Antonius? The letter has his seal. It is written in his appalling, tribunician Latin. This letter, then, reveals what is actually going on right now: we are witnessing a conspiracy on the part of the tribunes to overthrow a great man, and god only knows their motivations. Both seem eager for higher office. Perhaps they are just trying to shore up their own positions for a future agenda. Don’t be surprised if they soon propose a land bill that is popular with the people.

But if you respond, “How do we know that this letter is authentic?” I shall put the same question back to you, “How do you know that the letters they read in the senate were authentic?” You, and the tribunes, have no other corroborating evidence. The only thing you have to compare with those letters is my behavior in the senate, and, as I set forth above, my recent behavior in the senate has been impeccable. If you go by my deeds, then you must admit the folly of your decision to imprison me without trial. If you rely so entirely on letters produced by the Gracchi, then you really are fools.

The chickpea party and, in particular, Mr. Chickpea himself have not shown such impeccable behavior in the senate of late. He allies himself not only with a traitor of his own brother and murderers, but has even stooped to adopt a little barbarian. Perhaps he has grown similar in mind to his Greek lackey. Let me remind you of this simple fact: on the recommendation of Cicero I was imprisoned without trial. Now, we all know on the basis of his track record that Mr. Chickpea is no stranger to proceeding against Roman citizens without trial, but who would have thought that he would repeat this same tactic after being exiled for a similar action 20 years ago? Has he not learned his lesson? I vow here in this letter that he will – that pacing windbag will learn to keep his mouth shut. And what of the noble Brutus? His escape from a trial for his act of parricide only emboldens him. I remind you all that four men have marched on Rome in recent days, and Brutus was the first. He called down Decimus’ legions on the city without senatorial approval or knowledge, and it was only my quick thinking that preserved our noble city from a tyranny of the chickpeas. And what about their military appointments? They have Catullus, the poet-general, out in the field, a man who has less military experience than the little finger I lost to a Gallic swordsman and less courage than my daughter.

And look at you senators who formally pledged your loyalty to Caesar: you bow to this petty faction that clings womanishly to tradition and vainly believes it can stop what is coming. It cannot. And if you have any self-respect left you will leave your seats in the senate and come join me in the camp. I will make things right.

Thus, it is with a clean conscience that I flee the city and go to my legions. I have been wrongly imprisoned, falsely maligned, strikingly unappreciated, and drastically underestimated. But I will make these things right.

Marcus Antonius

Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus' Will: Now Public in the Forum

A copy of the will of my late brother-in-law, Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus, was left with my wife, Octavia, to be posted publicly in the event of his death.

The will stipulated that he did not appoint an heir. Instead, his monetary assets were to be assessed and distributed to the Roman Citizenry. He also pronounced Marcus Agrippa as the executor of his will.

Of course, the will Senate has already ruled that the will is not legitimate, that no such action will be taken, and that all of Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus' property is to be ceased in the name of the Senate.

Swifter Action is Needed: Charges against Mark Antony dropped

Due to recent events surrounding Marcus Antonius, namely his escape from prison, I have decided to drop the charges brought against him. I feel that because he will not be able to hear his verdict himself, the trial would only serve to take up time in which he can gain support outside of Rome. As is evidenced by his actions in the Senate yesterday and his fleeing custody, he believes he cannot defend himself and is labeling himself guilty. It is my recommendation that we as the Senate use measures more swift and decisive than trial against Marcus Antonius. Delaying in this matter will only lead to him attempting to exact revenge or use his ties with Caesar to gain support for himself in a bid for power. We have all seen what this can lead to and should prevent it at all costs. Marcus Antonius has clearly shown that he does not wish to cooperate with the Senate and as such should not be allowed to explain his actions or defend himself. Our delaying in action will only lead to another crisis. Let us learn from the past and act swiftly to prevent Marcus Antonius from gaining supporters. I plead with you fellow senators do not let Marcus Antonius become a new Lepidus, Octavianus, or Dolabella.

Paper topic #5

Julius Caesar left behind many papers, memoranda, etc., recording how he intended to deal with political appointments, internal issues, legislative initiatives, foreign policy matters, etc. These papers, along with Caesar’s various enactments while alive, are referred to as his acta.

Many Caesarians want approval of the acta out of self-interest, and believe that abolition of the acta would lead to chaos all over the empire. Indeed, the abolition of government appointments, financial arrangements, etc., could lead to social unrest and economic ruin, especially for those in debt. Approving the acta as a whole, on the other hand, is problematic, as a consul or other official could use the acta to justify and advance his own personal agenda in the future.

Republicans might feel that if the acta are still in effect, then the Caesarian system is still in effect. Some will argue that the acta logically should be rescinded since Caesar was a tyrant. By accepting the acta, the Senate in particular is binding itself to accept Caesar’s appointments to elective office. So Caesar, in spite of his death, will effectively control the direction future government is to take. Many Republicans may be outraged at Caesarians enjoying Pompeians’ property.

Should the Senate confirm Caesar’s acta?

Two pages, double-spaced, due in hard copy to Matt Wineski in class on FRIDAY, MARCH 28. Please e-mail to the Gamemaster at tkdix@uga.edu and post to the blog before class. You may post a longer version to the blog.

A Letter from Marcus Antonius

Senators,

Should the senate decide, in light of Marcus Antonius' recent escape, not to conduct his trial tomorrow, I would request from our two noble consuls that I be allowed to read this letter he has left with me aloud in the senate, as it holds information of the utmost importance for the senate and Roman people as a whole. I am sure that one and all will wish to hear what he has to say.

Marcus Cornelius

Escape

Senators,

By now you have undoubtedly discovered my escape from prison. I have been driven to this course by the overwhelming conspiracy against me. I will not wait passively to become the scapegoat needed for my enemies to elevate and reward their cronies. Despite my absence you may persecute my name and thus I have left a letter with my defense attorney Marcus Cornelius Cossus to help clear my name of these slanderous charges.


Marcus Antonius

The Charges against Marcus Antonius

Marcus Antonius is charged with:

Quaestio de maiestate, “diminishing the majesty of the Roman people”

Specifically through

1. Bribery
2. Conspiring to ambush Senators
3. Conspiring to do harm to a Tribune of the Plebs
4. Conspiring to assassinate a consul

Guards

Senators, in reaction to the overwhelming votes in the Senate meeting today, I have placed guards in front of Marcus Antonius' cell. This is to prevent any escape attempt he or any of his supporters may make. Ready your arguements for his trial on Wednesday.

The Trial of Marcus Antonius

Salvete, patres conscripti,

My name is Marcus Cornelius Cossus, and I am leading the defense for the noble and illustrious Marcus Antonius. I am delighted to hear that a relative of mine, Cinna, will be conducting the trial. I have every confidence that he will do so fairly and decorously.

The purpose of this brief letter is to DEMAND that the prosecution, in keeping with legal norm and proper behavior, make publicly known (i.e., post to the blog) the charges against Marcus Antonius. If we do not have these charges by tomorrow (3/25) at noon, I shall propose in the senate on Wednesday that this entire trial is a farce and that it be thrown out on the grounds that the defense had an inadequate amount of time to prepare for it.

Marcus

A Reminder from Your TA

On a topic other than the game, this is a reminder that the Olympics will be held this Saturday, March 29. The games will start at 9:00, and they will be at the Reed quad. Also, extra credit will be given for participation and victory. Everyone is welcome and encouraged to attend, but you will only be fed if I receive an email from you.

Matt Wineski

Some Lovely New Decor

Senators,

I have just witnessed a rather remarkable little scene in the forum. As I was taking my morning walk, I encountered a small crowd that seemed to be bearing several litters. At first I thought that this must be some sort of hastily assembled funeral procession. However, as they neared, I noticed that the expressions on the faces of the crowd were not ones of mourning, but rather that of anger. I must tell you that I found this rather disconcerting, so, hoping to prevent the outbreak of some sort of riot, I quickly approached the man who appeared to be the leader of the mob, and asked him whither they were going and what the cause of their anger might be. His answer, fellow Senators, surprised me. He answered me: "Sir, I am a veteran and served under Pompey, and it sickens me that we let the bodies of murderers and traitors be accorded the same honors as good and noble Romans. We are taking the bodies of Lepidus, Octavianus, and Dolabella to be dealt with properly." Astonished that such virtue still existed in Rome, I told him to carry on, and I followed the crowd up to the Tarpeian rock. At the edge of the cliff, the leader of the crowd halted. He had the bodies of the traitors brought forward, and, when the crowd had done so, he decapitated the traitorous dogs. The crowd then dumped the bodies off the cliff, and a small contingent ran down and dragged the bodies off through the streets to be dumped into the Tiber. Meanwhile, the veteran placed the heads on pikes and began to parade them down through the forum and finally placing them on the Rostrum, where they sit currently. I am amazed that men so virtuous still exist in our city, who know how to punish those who attempt to destroy our fatherland.

Clarification

My last speech was meant to represent my stance before class on Wednesday. I stood by Octavian as the heir of Julius Caesar, but (if I didn't make this clear, I'm sorry) he was an obvious threat to the state. I did not declare allegiance to anyone in my speech.

New Senators

Three senators will join the Senate tomorrow.

LUCIUS AEMILIUS PAULLUS (Mark Crowley) is the elder brother of Marcus Aemilius Lepidus. In 63, he brought formal charges of violence (vis) against Catiline; and he was one of the sponsors of the bill to recall Cicero from exile. Cicero called Paullus “a man born to preserve the Republic.” As curule aedile in 56, he began to restore the Basilica Aemilia in the Roman Forum, a building begun by the family in the second century BCE. He was praetor in 53 and consul in 50. He was a passive supporter of Julius Caesar in 50; perhaps he was won over by a huge donation from Caesar for the completion of the Basilica project, or perhaps he was helping his brother; in any event, he took no part in the Civil War.

GAIUS CLAUDIUS MARCELLUS (Kainien Morel) was consul in 50 BCE. Frustrated in his efforts to recall Julius Caesar from his province, Claudius called on Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus to take command of the two legions stationed at Capua and to raise more troops (2 December 50). After the outbreak of the civil war between Caesar and Pompey, Claudius remained in Italy and obtained Caesar’s pardon. In 46 he made a dramatic appeal to Julius Caesar for the pardon and return to Italy of his first cousin, Marcus Claudius Marcellus (consul 51 BCE), who had also opposed Caesar and had been in exile on the island of Mytilene in the eastern Mediterranean since 48. In response to Gaius' appeal and Caesar’s pardon of his cousin, Cicero delivered his speech of gratitude to Caesar, the pro Marcello. (Marcus Claudius Marcellus was murdered in 45, as he passed through Greece on his way back to Italy.)

Since 54 Gaius Claudius has been married to Octavia, daughter of Gaius Octavius and Atia (herself the daughter of Julia, Caesar’s sister) and sister of the young Gaius Octavius, adopted in his will by Julius Caesar.

LUCIUS CORNELIUS CINNA (Emily Allen) is from a patrician family and the son of Lucius Cornelius Cinna (consul 87, 86, 85, 84 BCE), who was the most famous supporter of Marius and opponent of Sulla. Cinna supported Marcus Aemilius Lepidus, the consul of 78, when he tried to dismantle Sulla’s “constitution,” and he joined Quintus Sertorius, a supporter of Marius and Cinna's father, in Spain, where Sertorius held out against the forces of Sulla through 75. Cinna was allowed to return to Italy, along with other supporters of Lepidus, in 70 BCE, supported by Julius Caesar (who was married to Cinna's sister at the time); but Sulla’s laws still prohibited Cinna from a public career until after Caesar captured Rome in the civil war and passed a law allowing the sons of those proscribed by Sulla to reenter public life. Cinna was elected praetor in 44. Cinna was not one of the conspirators against Caesar, but after Caesar's assassination Cinna joined the tyrannicides and took off the insignia of his office as praetor “because they were the gift of a tyrant.” Cinna resumed his insignia for the first Senate meeting after the assassination, but was attacked on his way to the Senate and was rescued by the magister equitum Marcus Aemilius Lepidus. The Roman mob attacked a tribune of the people named Cinna (Gaius Helvius Cinna) by mistake for Cornelius Cinna. After Caesar’s death, Cornelius Cinna sponsored the recall of the tribunes Gaius Caesetius Flavus and Gaius Epidius Marullus, who had been deprived of their tribunician powers after they removed a diadem from Caesar’s statue and prosecuted persons who saluted Caesar as king.

Rebellion in the Provinces

Senators I have some most grave though perhaps predictable news. Since we removed the legions to defend ourselves against the triumvirate there are grumblings of revolt in the provinces. As consul it is my duty to lead the armies of Rome in crushing this opposition; however, I am reluctant to leave Rome without any consuls in the city at this delicate time. My first duty is to the senate, next to the army. I will transfer the power of command to some worthy senators. Due to the overwhelming qualification of so many senators I have yet to choose who to send. I remind you that we already have Gaius Valerius Catullus and Lucius Antonius appointed to deal with the Syrian Province, but the legions from North Africa, Sardinia, the Hispanias, the Gauls, Illyricum and Macedon are all without leaders. Although I can give command of these legions away, I need you to vote to give funding and grain to the armies. I ask for your cooperation in this matter as it benefits none of us to have 17 legions leaderless, hungry, and without pay drifting across Italy.

A message from Lucius Antonius

A message has been sent from Lucius Antonius, as he is still co-commander of troops outside of Rome.

Fellow Senators! A great travesty has indeed occurred! I regret to tell you that the statues you may have seen in the forum recently are in the likeness of myself. Being immortalized next to the Gods is a great honor and I know that I have done nothing in my life worthy of such honor. Had I been in Rome at the time of their construction, I would have personally seen that they were immediately taken down and destroyed. When I returned to Rome it was at the co-command of troops with my fellow senator Catullus to help defend the city from those we once called our own. There was no time to focus on this issue, as my beloved city was under attack. Catullus and myself did the best we could with our limited military experience to help in the defense of our great city. I am happy to tell you now that the safety of our city is secure once more, I have turned my full attention to this great shame that has fallen onto me. I have taken it upon myself to be rid of the statues that I never deserved. As we speak they are being destroyed beyond recognition, never able to shame the forum with their presence again. My only regret is that they were ever put up at all.

Adoption of Caesarion

I, Marcus Tullius Cicero, have undertaken to pledge myself, and have acted upon this pledge, to adopt Caesarion, son of Cleopatra and Gaius Julius Caesar, into my household and family. I further pledge to ensure his continued safety within my household and those of my friends. he will be afforded a postion equal to that of my own son, as is appropriate to his young age. His mother, the Queen of Egypt, will be welcomed into my household as an honored guest, and will be provided full access to her son during his education in my my house. He will be given the name Marcus Ptolemy Tullius Caesarionis.

Marcus Tullius Cicero

[Please read comments]

Recovering

Senators,
You probably noticed that I was not in my usual place, just outside the senate house during its last meeting. I sat down to eat the other night, but stopped after the first taste. My poor servant is dead, and I am violently ill. Someone was obviously trying to poison me. He or she did not succeed. I will be returning to listen in on the Senate meeting today.
Cleopatra

A Queen in a Bind

Senators,

I firmly believe that one man with the potential to do great good has also the power to wreak great havoc. The late, great Julius Caesar saw a potential in his young nephew. He knew him to be cunning and bright. He saw a brave and courageous leader; he saw much of himself in the young man. Yet, few in the Senate felt the same. You recognize the all of the appointments and suggestions made by Caesar before is death, including the praetorship of the murderous, Brutus, accept for one. The young Caesar has acted according to his own dignitas. He knows he is all that his adopted father could have hoped for and more, but he is very dangerous now. We must not forget how important dignitas is to a Julius Caesar.
I find myself in a bind. I am a definite supporter of the young Julius Caesar, but, though my attempts at reaching out to you so far have been shot down, I still feel a sense of duty to Rome. If I stay in Rome amongst those left in the Senate, am I really going to be heard, understood, cared for, respected, or even recognized as one important to Rome in terms of resources? Catullus may make whatever outrageous claims of whose bed I may take comfort in, but nothing of the sort has happened. I still miss the warmth of the late Caesar. If he is referring to my obvious contact with Marcus Antonius and Gaius Julius Caesar, he should remember 1) These two were Caesar’s close and trusted friends before his death, and 2) they do not stand now beside a murderer and a coward. Also, I am sure as consul, Marcus Antonius receives a great deal of correspondence. There is no proof that any letter snatched by Catullus’ ridiculous fingers came from me.
Back to the topic at hand, where do I go from here? Where does my allegiance lie, with the rightful heir of Julius Caesar or with the Senate of Rome? Unless these two can be reconciled I am going to have to follow my heart. Unless someone wants to recognize that I am a strong, intelligent, and useful human being to the noble cause of protecting Rome, I am going to have to leave and give my support fully to the young Gaius Julius Caesar. I think he has a much to offer to the Senate and people of Rome. The senate has made a grave mistake in not seeing that.
On to Lepidus and Dolabella: I think the senate may regret a few of its recent decisions. 1) Lepidus should have been brought down immediately when he was still in Rome. 2) When Lepidus was declared an enemy of Rome, you sent out one legion, a legion unable to face the forces of Lepidus and led by an inept, debt-ridden fool. How can we be sure Dolabella won’t give in to Lepidus and join up with him after the offer of a bribe? Was Dolabella not a great supporter of Lepidus while he was still in the Senate? Was he not incredibly adamant about NOT sending a formidable force? I guess, we’ll have to wait and see where Dolabella’s heart truly is. I offered my aid, my grain, my friendship, and none of it has been accepted. What is it you want from me, Senators? I have offered it all. I just hope you know what you are doing when you have an army at your door. It is coming.

Cleopatra

P.S. That could have been read as a threat, but I don’t it wasn’t one. It was a warming.

Filth In the Forum

Fellow Senators! A great travesty has occurred. Statues have been erected in the forum of one of our tribunes, Lucius Antonius. Let me remind you that these statues join the placement of our all-powerful Gods, of Jupiter, Venus, and Mars. Remember that Caesar placed several statues of himself as well as one of the horse of Alexander the Great so that he might confirm the absolute power of the beings immortalized within the forum. What has Lucius Antonius done to deserve such an honor? Line his pockets and the pockets of the bankers who put the statues there. Careful Senators. I am wary of a man who brings upon himself such an honor. He has no right to be immortalized next to Jupiter, nay even Caesar. For at least Caesar exercised great military skill whereas Lucius Antonius exhibits none.


(This was approved by Dr.Dix/Gamemaster/Jupiter/Rockin' Classics Professor)