Pro Caelio

Essay Questions
1) Analyse the rhetorical devices employed by cicero in Pro Marco Caelio.
What impact would they have had on his audience?
2) Is Ciceros treatment of Clodia in Pro Marco Caelio fair?
https://theartofpolemics.com/2015/02/08/ciceros-antipathy-towards-clodiametelli/
3) Was Caelius guilty as charged?
4) How does court procedure and practice in Rome as evidenced by Pro
Marco Caelio compare with procedure and practice in the courts of
Australia today?

Roman Prosecution (in Rome)

-

Postulatio: Proposed prosecutor takes matter to the praetor (plaintiff, not

advocate) for the Praetor to investigate:
o Under what law is this forbidden
o What matter are you going to bring to court?
o Will you make it clear that he has committed an offence
o Assess relevance
o If more than one person brings case against the same defendant,
there is a Divinatio: one prosecutor is chosen
When successful, nominis delatio (nomen deferre = launch a prosecution)
Then pick the jurors, comprising the equites,
o Before 70BC, there was just one class: senators
o Then there was alteration in the law
o Getting one third senators, one third equites, one third tribuni
aerari: varied from min 30, max 70
o Also the praetor, who has limited power in influencing decision, only
announces the verdict given by the jurors
o Jurors not allowed to talk to anybody, just individual judgement
Prosecution counsel, prosecutor can speak for himself, then defence
counsel, usually there are three of each, including the prosecutor and
defendant himself.
Witnesses: either in person or in writing; prosecution compel witnesses,
defence only ask
Usually then you go to the vote, sometimes there is altercation:
interrogate the witness or engage in evidentiary or legal discussion with
counsel on the other side
Then there is the verdict
Vadimonium: bail, if you dont turn up you lose money

Exordium
[1]
If anyone, jurymen, were to be here now by chance, ignorant of our laws, our
trials, our customs, he would certainly wonder what the atrocity of this case is,
because on festival days and during public games, when all court business is
suspended, this court alone is in session, he would not doubt that the defendant

is accused of so great a crime that with that overlooked, the state would not be
able to continue to exist. The same man, when he hears that there is a law which
requires a trial to take place every day regarding mutinous and wicked citizens
who, after being armed, have besieged the senate, brought violence against the
magistrates, and lay siege the republic, he would not criticise the law, he would
expect a charge of a kind which is dealt with in a court. When he hears that no
wrongdoing, no audacity, no violence is being called into the court but that
young man with brilliant talent, diligence, and popularity, is being accused by the
son of the man whom he himself is both calling and has called into court,
moreover that he is being attacked with meretricious resources, he would not
fault the duty of this man, he would think that passions of a woman ought to be
repressed, he would regard you as hard-working, you to whom leisure is
permitted not even on a public holiday.

[2]
And indeed if you wish to attend diligently and judge truly about this whole case,
thus you will decide, gentlemen of the jury, neither anyone would come
down into court to make this accusation, to whom either one that he
wished was permitted, nor, after he had come down into the court,
would he have any hope unless he was relying on someones
unbearable passion and excessively bitter hatred. But I forgive Atratinus, a
most refined and distinguished young man, my friend, who has the excuse of
filial duty or necessity or youth if he wanted to accuse, I concede it to filial
duty, if he was ordered, to necessity, if he hoped for anything, to boyhood in no
way should the rest be forgiven, but they should also be fiercely opposed.

[3]
And indeed, jurymen, this beginning of the defence seems to me to suit most
remarkably the youthfulness of Marcus Caelius, so that I should firstly reply to
those things which the accusers have said for the sake of disgracing my client,
for the purpose of removing and stripping him of his standing. The accuser
objected that his father in various ways, in that it was said he himself was said to
be either not illustrious enough, or he was treated with insufficient filial duty by
his son. Concerning his standing, Marcus Caelius, to those who know him and to
those older people, replies easily both without my speech and without speaking
himself; let those to whom he is not equally known because for a long time now
he frequents the forum with us less on account of old age, let them consider
thus: that whatever dignity may be able to exist in a Roman knight, which can
certainly be very great, that has always been, and is to this day, considered to be
found in Marcus Caelius in the highest degree not only by his own people but
also by all those to whom he was able to be known for some reason.

[4]
But to be the son of a Roman knight, ought to be placed by way of a charge by
the accusers neither to these men are judging, nor to myself defending. For that
which you have said about duty, it is indeed your opinion, our opinion is another,
but the judgement is certainly the fathers. What our opinion is you will hear from
the witnesses under oath; what his parents feel, the tears of his mother and
remarkable grief, the rent clothes of his father and this present sadness which
you can see, and his agony, declare.

[5]
As for the fact that the young man was objected to by his countrymen, has not
been proven by his own people, none of the people of Praetuttia present ever
granted any higher honours than the absent Marcus Caelius; whom they both
elected into a most dignified order while absent, and granted those things to him
not seeking them which they deny to many men seeking them. And these same
people have now sent their leading men both of our order and Roman knights
with the document of their appointment to this court and with a very substantive
and distinguished testimonial. I seem to have established the foundations of my
defence, which are very solid, if they rely on their own judgement. For this young
man could not be commended to you enough, if he incurred the displeasure of
not only his father, such a fine man, but also a municipality so illustrious and
important.

[6a]
And indeed, to return to myself, I flowed forth from these springs to the renown
among, and my court work here and the course of my life ran down to the
favourable opinion of men a little more broadly because of the commendation
and judgement of my own people.

[6b]
Now that objection which was made about his morals, and that which was
bruited abroad not by the charges of all the prosecution but by their insults and
taunts, that Marcus Caelius will never endure so bitterly that he should regret
that he was born handsome. For those taunts have been spread abroad against
all those in whose youth, their form and appearance were well-bred. But it is one
thing to cast abuse, another to accuse: accusation requires a charge, to define a
fact, to mark a man, to prove by argument, to support by testimony. Abuse,
however, has no objective except insult; which if it is launched quite
aggressively, is called abuse, if quite eloquently, polished wit.

[7]
I was surprised and particularly annoyed that this part of the accusation was
given to Atratinus. For it neither suited him, nor did his age demand it, as you
could notice, nor did the modesty of this excellent young man allow him to
engage in language of that kind. I could wish that someone from you tougher
accusers had taken this place; we would be able to oppose that licence of casting
abuse considerably more freely and more forcefully, and more in our custom.
With you, Atratinus, I will deal more gently, because both your own morals
restrain my speech, and I ought to protect my kind favours toward you and your
father.

[8]
However, I wish that you were advised of that, first so that everyone thinks that
you are the sort of person that you are so that you keep away from as much
baseness of deed, so that you should separate yourself from freedom of
language; next, that you do not say against another those things which, when
they are said against you falsely, you would blush. For who is there to whom that
path would not be available, who is there who cannot cast abuse as aggressively
as he wishes against that youth and against those good looks even if without any
suspicion, but not without any argument? But the blame for that role of yours lies

with those who wished you to do it; the praise belongs to your morals because
we saw you speak those things unwillingly, to your talent because so spoke
elegantly and in a polished manner.

[9]
But for all that speech my defence is brief. For as long as the age of Marcus
Caelius could give scope for that suspicion of yours, it was protected first by his
own morals, then even by the carefulness and training of his father. As soon as
he gave my client the toga of manhood I shall say nothing in this place about
me; let it be so much as you think I will say this, that my client was
immediately taken to me by his father; no one has seen my client in that flower
of youth except when he was being taught with his father or with me or in the
very virtuous home of Marcus Crassus in the most honourable arts.

[10]
Now as for the objection that has been made against Caelius of his friendship
with Catiline, it ought to be above a long way from that suspicion of yours. For
you all know, my client being a young man, Catiline competed for the consulship
with me. If he attached himself to him, or left me (although many good young
men have supported that worthless and reprobate man), then let Caelius be
regarded as having been too friendly with Catiline. But indeed, afterwards, we
know and see that my client was indeed in amongst Catilines friends. Who
denies it? But I defend that in this place, that time of youth which is weak by its
own nature, is threatened by the passion of others. He was in fact always with
me while I was praetor; he did not know Catiline; then as praetor, he was holding
the province of Africa. A year then followed, when Catiline defended himself for
extortion. My client was with me; he did not ever come to him even as an
advocate. Next was the year in which I sought the consulship. Catiline was
seeking it with me. He never approached that man, he never left me.

[11]
Therefore, for so many years, having been engaged in the forum without
suspicion, without ill-repute, he supported Catiline when he was standing for
office for the second time. For how long, therefore, do you think you have to
protect a young man? Indeed, we once had a single year established to restrain
the arm in a toga and we would engage in discipline and training on the Campus
wearing tunics, and the same rationale applied, if we immediately began military
service, in barracks and in the field. In that time of life, except for he who was
defending himself with his own gravitas and morality and both with training at
home, and also with a certain natural goodness, however he was protected by
his kinsmen, he nevertheless would not be able to escape grave disrepute. But if
someone had kept those first beginnings of his life intact and inviolate, when he
had already matured, and was a man among men, no one would speak ill of his
reputation for chastity.

[12]
Now Caelius did support Catiline, when he had already been in the forum for
several years; and many have done this same thing from all orders and from all
stages of life. For Catiline, as I think you remember, had very many signs of the
greatest virtue, not well-defined but shadowy. He was associating with many
wicked men; and yet he pretended that he was devoted to excellent men. There

were, in his case, many enticements to lust; for there were also certain
incentives for hard work and toil. The faults of passion were ablaze in him; yet
his zeal of military science was thriving in his case. I do not think that any
monstrosity such as this has ever existed on earth, fused together from natural
enthusiasms and desires, contradictory and diverse, and fighting amongst
themselves.

[13]
Who, at one time, could be more friendly with particularly illustrious men, who
was also more intimately connected to rather base men? Who was once a
citizen of nobler factions, who was a more loathsome enemy of this state? Who
was more corrupted in his excesses, who was more enduring in his labours? Who
was more covetous in his avarice, who was more lavish in his largess? But the
following, gentlemen of the jury, were paradoxical in this man, namely to
embrace many with his friendship, to enjoy their regard with affection, to share
with everyone what he had, to subordinate his actions to the needs of all his
supporters with money, with influence, with manual labour, with crime and even,
if the need arose, with recklessness, to adapt and rule his nature to suit the
occasion and twisting and turning it this way and that, spending his life austerely
with the serious, pleasantly with the relaxed, earnestly with old men, affably with
the youth, daringly with the criminal, and dissolutely with the lavish.

[14]
As a result of this nature so changeable and multifaceted, when he had gathered
all the wicked and reckless men from all the lands, and was then holding fast
many strong and fine men in a certain pretence of spurious virtue. And the
abominable urge to destroy this republic would not have ever projected out of
him unless the great enormity of his so many vices was reliant on certain roots of
good nature and patience. For which reason that insinuation, jurymen, should be
rejected and the charge of familiarity should not stick to Catiline; for this was
shared with many men, and especially with certain good men. Even me, me I
say, did he almost ensnare at one time, when he appeared to be a good citizen
to me, and desirous of excellent company and a steady and loyal friend. I
discovered the crimes of his with my eyes before report, with my hands
before suspicion [by sight before I could comprehend it, by touch
before I had grounds for suspicion].
Even if Caelius was among Catilines great bands of friends, it is more the case
that he should suffer that he was wrong with annoyance [be annoyed that
he made a mistake], just as sometimes, in relation to the same man, I also regret
my error, than that he should dread an accusation for that friendship with that
man.
- hac natura ablative of means
- commune long u
- facinora: all short syllables, o before the final syllable can be long or short
- optimum doesnt mean excellence, therefore has to be masculine
- I had to see it and touch it before I could believe it: incredulity
- reformidet long I

[15]
And so, your language has slid down from insults against his morals, to stirring
up prejudice on the ground of conspiracy. For you have put it to us, but that only
falteringly and briefly, that my client was a participant in the conspiracy because
of his friendship with Catiline; on this matter not only did the charge fail to stick,
but the speech of an eloquent young man was hardly held together. For what
madness so great is there in Caelius, what wound so serious either in customs
and character or in circumstance and fortune? Finally, when was the name of
Caelius heard in that suspicion of yours? I speak too much about a matter of
minimal doubt, however I say this: not only if he had been an ally of the
conspiracy, but also if he had not been the utterly opposed to that crime, he
would never have wished to especially recommend his youth by an accusation of
conspiracy. [at some point in the past, Caelius prosecuted someone on grounds
of conspiracy he would never have done this if he had been friendly to this
conspiracy; an a fortiori argument]
- itaque three short syllables (emphasis on the i)
- oratio can mean language or a speech
- vestra refers to the three prosecutors

[16]
Perhaps, I am inclined to think that I ought to reply in the same way about
ambition and about those charges of cronies and bribery agents [hang onto
money to bribe people], because I have arrived at this point of my speech. For
Caelius had never been so mad that, if he had stained the reputation of himself
with that boundless ambition of which you speak, he would accuse another man
of bribery, nor would he seek to cause suspicion against another man of that
deed, for which he wanted the uninterrupted freedom to do it himself, nor, if he
thought the trial of the charge of ambition ought to be undergone by himself,
would he himself accuse another man once more for the charge of ambition.
Because although he acts unwisely and with my disapproval, he nevertheless it
is a mark of ambition of the kind that it seems to pursue the innocence of
another man rather than to have fearful regard for itself.
Periculum ambitus danger of being charged on the count of bribery
Est + genitive -> it is a mark of

[17]
As for the objection that was made to debt, the blamed expenditures, the books
of account, see how I respond little. He who is in the power of his father makes
no account. He never made any borrowing whatsoever to pay off another loan.
He faces charge of one kind, namely, of his rent: you said that he is paying rent
of thirty thousand sesterces. Now finally, I understand that the Publius Clodius
has a block of flats for sale, of which my client rents an apartment, as I believe,
for 10 000 sesterces. But you, while you wish to please that ..you adapted your
lie to suit his purpose.

[18]
You have reproved him for the fact that he moved out from his fathers home.
Which in this age now, indeed ought to be least complained about. When he
achieved, from a public case, a victory irksome to me indeed, yet glorious to
himself, and could stand for public office because of his age (what is etet
doing), he moved out from his home not only with his fathers permission, but
also with his advice, and, since his fathers home was a long way away from the
forum, so he could more easily both come to our houses (Crassus and Cicero)
and be nurtured by his own relations, he rented a house on the Palatine hill for a
reasonable price. Under this head, I can say that which the most distinguished
man, Marcus Crassus, when complaining about the arrival of king Ptolemy, said a
little earlier:
I wish that not in the forest of Pelion
And I grant myself the liberty to continue this poem longer:
For the mistress straying from virtue
Never revealed this annoyance to us
Medea wounded in her sick heart by savage love.

The Argo was the first ship ever built: Jason and the Argonauts. Pelion was
supposed to be where they got the wood for it. (Ennius Media Exul)
Jason, offensive guy, says to his wife were through now, she gets fed up,
she gets a cloak on which she pours poison, and it designed for his new
lover. She is burnt to a crisp. Medea kills her children and runs away.

For thus, jurymen, you will discover what I show when I have come to that part of
my speech, that this Medea on the Palatine (Clodia) was for this young man the
cause of all his misfortunes or rather all the rumours.
-

Generis: emphasis on the gen

Sesterces: emphasis on the ses
Intellego: emphasis on the tell

[19]
On that subject, relying on your discretion, jurymen, I am not afraid of those
allegations which from the language of the prosecution I understand are now
being prepared and fabricated. For they were tossing out remarks that a senator
would be a witness, who would say that he was beaten up by Caelius during the
pontifical elections. From whom I will first ask, if he makes an appearance, why
he did not take any action immediately, secondly, if he preferred to complain
than to prosecute, why would he rather be brought forward by you rather than by
himself on his own behalf, why did he prefer to complain so much later rather
than at once. If he responds to me regarding these questions acutely and
astutely, then I shall finally ask him, from which source does this senator spring.
For if he arises and is born out of himself, perhaps, as is my custom, I will be
impressed. But if he is a rivulet drained and lead from the fountainhead of your
accusation, I will be delighted, even though your accusation relies on so much

influence and such enormous resources, that one senator was found alone who is
willing to oblige you.
[20] Nor, however, do I fear that of the other kind of nocturnal witnesses. For it
was said by them that there would be wives roughly handled by Caelius.
-

Hyperbaton keeps suspense

Nor, in any case, do I fear that other variety of witnesses, 20 gentlemen of the
night. For it was said that there will be some ready to declare that their wives,
returning from a dinner-party, were indecently handled by Caelius. Men of
character will they be who will dare to make such a declaration on oath, though
they will have to confess that they have never, not even by any meeting and
arrangement, attempted to reach a settlement about such grave wrongs!
c

IX. But you can already foresee the whole nature of this attack, gentlemen, and
when it is launched it will be your duty to repel it. For the real accusers of Marcus
Caelius are not those who attack him. The shafts are let fly at him openly: they
are furnished by a hidden hand. Nor do I say this to bring odium upon those
For Marcus Caelius is not being accused by the same men by whom he is being
attacked: spears are being hurled at him openly, yet supplied secretly.
[21] Nor am I saying this to foment hatred against those to whom this
prosecution in fact ought to be glorious. They are performing their duty, they are
defending their own people, they are doing that which the bravest men are
accustomed to do: when injured, they suffer, when enraged, they get carried
away. But nevertheless it is a matter for your wisdom, judges, if there is a just
reason for brave men to besieging Marcus Caelius, not to think that you too have
a just reason for paying attention to anothers resentment rather than your own
good faith. For you see what a crowd of people is in the forum, what classes of
men, what political support [studia] of men, what variety of men. From this
large number, how many do you think there are who would be accustomed to
offer themselves voluntarily, to devote their energies, to promise testimony to
powerful, influential, eloquent men when they think that they want something? If
anyone from this class of men has by chance thrown themselves forth into this
trial, feel free to shut out their ambition, judges, from your wisdom, so that you
may appear at the same time to give regard to my clients safety, and your
sacred oath [religio = oath], and for the general welfare of all the citizens in the
face of the dangerous power of those men. And indeed I will not lead you away
from witnesses, and I shall not permit the truth of this trial, which is by no means
able to be changed, to depend on the discretion/fickle inclinations of the
witnesses, which can very easily be moulded, bent and twisted with no trouble.
We will conduct our case by arguments, we will refute the charges with evidence
clearly than daylight; fact will fight with, reason will fight with reason, logic will
fight with reason.
- witnesses are unreliable: swayed by being bribed, see something they dont like
- Don't want actual facts to be perverted by the witnesses
- undermining the prosecutions witnesses
- tamen: both short

- Vestrae sapientiae: genitive of characteristic

- non si is not nisi: nisi = if something does not happen, unless something
happens. Non si = not if thatbut that; positive if then something should
not happen
- fidei: oath of good faith
- dolor = grief you suffer, or grief you cause to others
- causam...oppugnandi
- consulo + dative
[23] And so I am perfectly happy that that part of the case, seriously and
elegantly pleaded by Marcus Crassus about the riots of Naples, about the assault
on the Alexandrians at Puteoli, and about the goods of Palla. I wish that he had
spoken [it had been said by the same man] also of Dio. However, what is it about
that very man which you would are waiting for? Because he who did it either
does not fear it, nor even fails to admit it. For he is a king [Ptolemy, relative of
Alexander the Great]. However, he who was said to have been an accessory and
accomplice, Publius Ascius, was acquitted by the court. Therefore, should my
client, who was removed not only from the deed, but also suspicion of
involvement, dread that charge which is of such a kind that he who has
committed it, does not deny it, while he who has denied it is acquitted
[pertimescat = deliberative subjunctive]? And, if the trial benefited Asicius more
than the hatred did him harm, will your slander do harm to my client, who has
been sullied not even by the suspicion of that deed, but not even with ill-repute?
[24] But Asicius, it is argued, was acquitted as a result of collusion. It is very
easy to respond to that position, particularly for me, by whom that case was
defended. But Caelius thinks that Asicius had an excellent case; however, he
thinks no matter of what nature it may have been, it is unconnected from his
own case. Nor is Caelius alone, but also highly cultivated and learned young
men, endowed with the most proper training and most excellent skills, Titus and
Gaius Coponius, who above all deeply grieved the death of Dio, who were
attached to him both by enthusiasm for learning and culture and also ties of
hospitality by Dio. He was living at Titus home, as you have heard, Dio, he had
been known to him at Alexandria. What either does Titus or his brother endowed
with the highest distinction think about Marcus Caelius you will hear from them if
they are produced as witnesses.
[25a] Therefore, let these things be set aside, so that at last we shall come to
those things on which the case turns.
[25b] Indeed, I became aware that my learned friend, Lucius Herenius, was being
listened to attentively by you. In which case, though for a great part, you were
being held by his talent and a certain way of speaking, I nevertheless was
sometimes afraid that that language introduced with fine judgement for the
purpose of making an accusation gradually and gently insinuated itself into your
minds [accederet = made an entry into]. For indeed he said many things about
profligacy, many things about wantonness, many things about the vices of youth,
many things about morality; and, he who is for the rest of his life gentle, and in
his familiar charm of cultured behaviour in which almost everyone now takes

pleasure, he was in this case a certain very severe uncle, moralist, school
teacher. He has reprimanded Marcus Caelius, like a parent has ever done to no
one; he dilated on much about his lack of restraint and lack of self-control; In
short, gentlemen of the jury, I forgave you for listening attentively, because I
myself was trembling at so stern a thing, so hostile a kind of language.
[26] And this was the first part which stirred me less: that Caelius was intimate
with my friend, Bestia, that he had dined with him, come many a time to his
home, supported his praetorship. These remarks, which are blatantly false, do
not worry me; and indeed he said that those that dined together with him, who
are either absent, or who must necessarily say the same [for whom it is
necessary to say the same that they were there]. Nor, however, does this
trouble me, the fact that he said that Caelius was an associate of his of the
Luperci. A particular savage fraternity, certainly pastoral and boorish [agrestis],
of the Luperci brothers, whose famous wooded assemblies were established
before civilisation and laws, in fact not only did the followers launch prosecutions
against each other, but they even implicated the fraternity in making their
accusation, as if they feared lest someone would not know of it! But I pass over
these matters; I respond to those things which have affected me more.
[27b]
His rebuke of self-indulgence was long, and at the same time gentler, and had
more argument than harangue in it, on account of which it was listen to even
more attentively. I hardly need to mention Publius Clodius [used to be Claudius
but changed his name to become tribune of the plebs], my friend, when he was
throwing himself about with the utmost gravitas and most furiously, and having
been enraged at everything, he continued with the sternest of words, with a
booming voice, although I approved of his eloquence, I still was not fazed; for in
several cases I have seen him litigating fruitlessly. To you, however, Balbus
[cognomen, nickname = stammering, also the god Baal -> Spanish], I respond
first of all, with your permission, if it is allowed, if it is right for this man to be
defended by me, the man of a kind who has never turned down a dinner, who
has been in the gardens [extravagance], who has worn perfumes, who has been
to see Baiae.
[28]
And yet I have both seen and heard that many in this state, not only those who
had taken a tiny sip of this kind of life and had touched, as it is said, with the tips
of their fingers, but those who had surrendered the whole of their youth to
sensualities, had finally surfaced and, as it is said, returned themselves to
morality and were serious and distinguished men. For some play is granted by
common consent to this age of play, and nature herself pours forth the desires of
adolescence. If they break out in such a way that they overthrow no ones life, or
overturn no ones household, they are usually considered easy to tolerate.
-

Ptolemy here is the father of the famous Cleo

Auletes = pipe player, not flute player

[29] But to me you seemed to wish to kindle [weld two things youre not
supposed to together] some hostility toward Caelius from the common bad
reputation of youth. And so all that silence which was devoted to your speech

arose for this reason, namely because of the fact that, while a single defendant
was brought forth, we were thinking about the vices of many. It is easy to accuse
profligacy. Day would fail me now, if I were to try to announce those things which
can be said on that subject. On corruption, on adultery, on shameless conduct,
on extravagant expenditure [sumptus = expenditure], a speech would be
immense. Although you are depicting [tibi = to yourself] no one as a defendant,
but mere vices, the matter itself is still able to be the subject of an accusation
both at length and seriously. But it is a matter for your wisdom, gentlemen of the
jury, for you not to be lead away from the defendant; nor to discharge them
against a man and against the defendant, the stings which your strictness and
gravitas have, when a prosecutor has provoked them, against the situation,
against their morality, against the times, when he has been called against a
particular undeserved hatred not by his own fault, but because of the vice of the
many.
Concessa - permission
[30a] And so I do not dare to respond to your strictness in such a way as I should.
For it was my task to plead for exemption for his youth and seek pardon. I do not,
I say, I do not dare. Not at all do I make use of the excuse of age, I renounce the
rights that are granted to everybody; I only seek that, if there is any common
hatred of debt, wantonness, the flagrancy of youth at this time, which I see is
great, that the sins of others, the sins of his age and the times, do not harm my
client. Nonetheless, I too, who demands these things, do not object to [from =
quin, modelled on prevention clause] respond most carefully to the charges
which are being levelled against my client in particular.
-

Itaque three shorts

Inquam is parenthetic exclamation, no indirect statement follows
Aeris = 3 syllable word
Temporum = o is short
Idem = long I -> nom masculine sg
Idem = short I -> nt nom and acc
Respondeam is subjunctive following quin

Tristis can mean stern, severe, strict.

[30b]
There are, however, two charges, of gold, and of poison; in which one and the
same individual is involved. The gold was obtained from Clodia, the poison was
sought to be given to Clodia, as is alleged. All the others are not charges, but
slanders, more characteristic of an impudent invective rather than judicial
inquiry. Adulterer, pervert, bribery agent is abuse, not an accusation; for there
is no foundation to these charges, no grounds; words of abuse have been rashly
uttered by an enraged prosecution with no authority.
- mitto = I let slip, I let go -> I send
[31] I see the authority of these two charges, I see the source, I see an
indisputable name and fountainhead. He needed gold: he took it from Clodia, he
took it without witness, he kept it as long as he wished. I see a great sign of a
certain illustrious relationship. He wanted to kill her, the same: He sought the

poison, he incited those he could, he prepared it, he decided the time and place,
he brought it.
Again, I see that a hatred, great again, has come into existence, with the most
savage rupture. In this case, gentlemen of the jury, all we have to deal with is
Clodia, a woman not only of noble stock, but with a reputation; about whom I will
say nothing except for the purpose of defending the charge. But you understand
given your outstanding level of care, Gnaeus Domitius, that we are dealing with
this woman alone.
- video emphasis on the vid
- anaphora of video.
- sumpsit sumpsit then woah habuit
- two tricolons: videocaput, sumpsitvoluit
- e grex (out of the flock)
- nobili long o
- nota short o
- intellegis, emphasis on the tell
- why is Gaius spelt with a C? alpha beta Gamma
[32] [quae = she who] If she says that she did not lend the gold to Caelius, if she
argues that the poison was not prepared for her by my client, we are acting
shamelessly, if we are calling a mistress of the house, otherwise than the virtue
of matrons requires. But if, after this woman is set aside, neither any charge, nor
any means to attack Marcus Caelius are left to the prosecution, what else is there
which we as counsel for the defence would be expected to do, except to refute
those who are attacking my client? That indeed, I should do all the more
forcefully, if my enmities between me and that womans husband her brother, I
meant to say, I always get this wrong did not intervene. Now I shall proceed
cautiously and I will not go on for longer than my good faith and this case compel
me. For I did not think that ever think that I would bear hostilities against women
[have to deal with a womans hostility], especially with a woman whom
everybody has always considered to be every mans escort rather than anyones
enemy.
- potius short o
- putaverunt emphasis on the ver
But, however, from this woman, I will first ask whether she prefers me to deal
with her strictly and seriously and in an old-fashioned manner, or in a relaxed
style, and gently, and in a modern way. So If in the former grim custom and
habit, I must rouse someone from the infernal depths out of those fully bearded
men of yore, not with this trimmed beared in which this woman takes pleasure,
but with a rough one which we see on ancient statues and effigies, to [who
could] chasten the woman and speak on my behalf so she does not, by chance,
become angry at me. Therefore, let someone from this very family appear, and
above all, that famous Appius Claudius the Blind; For he who will not see this

wretch, will feel the least pain. He who, assuredly, if he steps forward, will act
thus and speak thus:
[34] Woman, whats Caelius to you, whats this young man to you, whats
anothers husband to you? Why were you either so intimate with this man as to
lend him gold, or so inimical as to fear poison? Had you not seen your father, had
you not heard that your uncle, grandfather, great-grandfather, great-great-greatgrandfather, were consuls? Finally, did you not know that you had lately held the
marriage of Quintus Metellus, the most illustrious and gallant man and most
devoted to his fatherland, who as soon as he extended his foot outside his door,
exceeded almost everyone in manly courage, glory, standing? Since you had
married from the most distinguished family into an equally renowned family, why
was Caelius so intimate with you? Was he a relative, an in-law, of your husbands
family? None of these. What therefore, was there except a certain recklessness
and wantonness? If the effigies of our men did not ever influence you, didnt
even my own daughter, that Quinta Claudia urge you to rival the glory of our
house in womanly glory, didnt that famous Claudia, the Vestal virgin, who
embraced her father and did not allow him, while he was celebrating his triumph,
to be dragged from his chariot by a hostile tribune of the plebs? Why did the
faults of your brother move you rather than the merits of your father and
ancestral qualities throughout all the generations from our time repeated both
among men and also among women?
-

Severe three long

Illo austere more ac modo ablative of manner
Pyrrhus victory cost Rome so much almost not worth having
Superabat emphasis on the ra
Modo short os = lately, recently
Aemulam + objective genitive
Bona short o

To the bottom of page 45. Read translation of the whole speech.

Start from section 50 next week
Talk about the charges Cicero refers to who brought it? Was it successful? Was
there evidence of guilt or innocence?
Spend 20-30 minutes on Thursday going through the charges.
Was it for this that I broke off the peace of Pyrrhus so that you could strike
bargains of the most shameful amours [descriptive genitive] every day, was it for
this that I brought water [aqueducts], so that you could use it for your filthy,
even incestuous, loves, was it for this that I built the road, so that you could
frequent it in the company of other womens husbands?
[35] But why, gentlemen of the jury, have I brought in a person so serious that I
fear that the same Appius would suddenly change his mind and begin to accuse
Caelius with that well-known censorial gravitas of his? But I will have seen this
later on, and in such a way, gentlemen of the jury, that I trust that I will justify
the life of Marcus Caelius even to the severest of judges. But you, madam for
now I myself, not an imaginary person [with no person introduced], speak to you
if you think to prove those things which you do, which you say, which you
allege, which you plan, which you accuse, it is essential for you to report and

explain the reason for such great friendship, such great intimacy, so great a
bond. The prosecution indeed is bandying about debauchery, amours, adulteries,
visits to Baiae, seaside parties, dinner banquets, revelry, songs, bands, boating
parties; similarly, they indicate that they say nothing with your disapproval.
Since you with a frame of mind, of some kind, I do not know what, with which
unbridled and suddenly you wished that these matters be brought into the Forum
and into the court, it is appropriate that you either disprove them and explain
that they are false, or to admit that nothing, neither your charge nor your
testimony, ought to be believed.
- femina -> specifically to distinguish from a man, can mean wife [like vir]
- mulier = just a woman
- jussive subjunctive necesse est + subjunctive [paratactic construction]
- iacto can mean boast
- nescio = nescio quis
- aut dilvas oportetfateare -> dilemma = both options are against you
[36] But if, however, you prefer that I proceed in a more polished manner, I will
deal with you as follows: I will remove that severe and almost boorish old man.
Therefore, I will summon someone from these relatives of yours, preferably your
youngest brother, who is the most refined in that family of yours, who loves you
most dearly, who on account of some kind of anxiety and certain unfounded
fears, as a boy, I believe, always went to bed with you, his elder sister. Imagine
him saying to you: Why are you making such a fuss, sister? Why have you gone
mad? Why, having started to create such a shout with words, why do you make a
mountain out of a molehill?
You caught sight of a [little] young man, a neighbour. My clients radiance, and
tall stature, his face and eyes, drove you mad; you wanted to see him more
often. You were sometimes in the same gardens. As a high-born woman you wish
to have that son with a mean and stingy father bound fast by your wealth. You
cannot: he kicks, he spurns you, he thrusts you away, he does not think that your
gifts are worth so much. Take yourself off to someone else. You have gardens
near the Tiber which you have prepared deliberately and carefully in that place
which all the young men come for the sake of swimming. From here, you are
allowed to collect marriages every day. Why do you pester my client who spurns
you?
[37] I return now to you in turn, Caelius, and for myself I take up the authority
and severity of a father. But I hesitate as to which father I should assume: some
vehement and strict one, Caecilianus: Now, for At last my mind blazes, now my
heart is full of wrath, or this one:
O unlucky, O wicked!
Those fathers are iron-hearted: What should I say? What should I wish? All those
things which you do with your shameful deeds so that I wish in vain, scarcely
bearable.

Such a father would say: Why did you stay in the vicinity of that prostitute? Why
did you not flee after recognising her enticements?
[50]
Now I deliberately disregard your wrongs, Clodia, I set aside the memory of my
suffering, I pass over the things which you cruelly did my family in my absence;
let these words which I have said not be said against you. But I require you
yourself, since the prosecutors say that they have both the charge originating
from you and you yourself as the witness for the prosecution: if there were some
woman of that sort which I described a little earlier, quite dissimilar to you, with
the life and manners of a prostitute, surely it does not seem thoroughly shameful
and contemptible to you that a young man would have some sort of relation with
this woman? [videatur indirect question subjunctive] If you are not this woman,
just as I prefer, what is it that the prosecution object to Caelius? But if they mean
you to be her, why should we [delib subj] dread this charge, if you despise it? For
which reason give us a path and reason for the defence. For either your modesty
will defend nothing too unruly done by Marcus Caelius, or your shamelessness
both to my client and the rest of them will give great opportunity for their
defence.
[51]
But since my speech now seems to have surfaced from the depths and sailed by
the crags, the remainder of the course is shown to me to be rather easy. For
there are two charges, of the gravest crimes, concerning one woman, one of gold
which is said to be taken form Clodia, and one of poison, which they allege
Caelius prepared for the purpose of killing Clodia, the same one. He took the
gold, as you say, so he could give it to the slaves of Lucius Lucceius, by whom
the Alexandrian Dio, who was living with Lucceius at the time, could be killed. It
is a serious charge either for ambassadors to be ambushed or for slaves to be
incited against a guest of their master, a plan full of wickedness, full of boldness!
[quidem often splits stuff up]
[52]
In relation to that charge indeed I ask this first, whether he told Clodia for that
purpose he was taking the gold, or whether he did not tell her. If he did not tell
her, why did she give it? If he told her, she tied herself up in the same crime. Did
you dare to take the gold from your cabinet, to strip that Venus of yours of her
jewels, the despoiler of the rest of your men, when you knew for how serious a
crime this gold was being sought, for the murder of an ambassador, for an
indelible stain of the crime to be brought on Lucius Lucceius, the most pious and
upright man? Your well-educated mind ought not to have been complicit in this
deed so terrible, your popular household ought not to have given assistance,
finally that welcoming Venus of yours ought not to have been an assistant.
[53a]
Balbus was alive to this. He said that Clodia was kept in the dark, also that
Caelius put it to her that he was seeking gold for the decorating of the games. If
he was so intimate with Clodia as you suggest he was, since you say so much
about his profligacy, he certainly told her why he wanted the gold; if he was not
as familiar, she did not give it. Thus, if Caelius told you the truth, oh wanton

woman, you knowingly gave him the gold for the deed; if he did not dare to tell
you, you did not give it to him.
[53b] Why should I now oppose this charge with arguments, which are countless?
I can say that the character of Marcus Caelius is separated the longest way away
from the shocking nature of such a great crime; it is far less credible for a man so
talented and so sensible [dative of reference] that it did not come into the mind
that the matter amounting to so great a crime ought not to be entrusted to the
slaves of a stranger and someone else. I can even in that well-known fashion [abl
manner] both of other advocates and in my own custom ask from the
prosecutors where Caelius convened with Lucceius slaves, what means of
access he had; if he was there by himself, with what rashness? If through the
agency of another, whose? I can cover all the places where suspicion hides by
speaking. No motive, no site, no opportunity, no accomplice, no hope of
executing and concealing the crime, no reason at all, no trace of the most
terrible crime will be found.
- perquirere, emphasis on the qui
- 2nd conjugation, emphasis on the first e in the infinitive ending
[54] But these things, which are fitting for an orator, which could have brought
me an advantage not on account of my talent but on account of my experience
and practice in speaking, since they seem to have been worked up by me myself
and produced in evidence, I abandon them all for the sake of brevity. For I have,
gentlemen of the jury, someone who you would allow easily to be an ally to the
sacred bond of your oath, Lucius Lucceius, the most virtuous man and most
serious witness, the sort of man who could not have failed to hear that so terrible
a crime against his fame and fortune, if it had been committed by Marcus
Caelius, nor could have ignored it, nor could have supported it. [an indicates
question in a direct question, dont need to be translated] Would this man,
endowed with that well known cultivation, those pursuits, those arts and
teaching have been able to ignore the danger of that very man, whom he was
fond of on account of these very studies, and harshly accept a crime in intended
against another man, which he would have omitted to care against a guest?
Would he learn that it was committed by strangers, then grieve and deny that
that was attempted by his own slaves? Would he censure the deed in the
countryside or in public places, and leniently endure it to be initiated in the city
and his own home? What would he not overlook in the event that some rustic
was in danger [danger of some rustic], would a cultivated man think to hide in
the event of a plot against a most learned man?
[55] But why do I hold you back any longer, gentlemen of the jury? Look upon the
solemnity and authority of this man, having sworn his oath, and carefully take
account of all his words of testimony. Read it out.
The testimony of Lucius Lucceius
What more do you expect? Or do you think that some voice itself could send forth
on behalf of this reason and truth? This is a defence of innocence, this a speech of
reason [ipsius?], this is the one voice of truth. On that charge there is no suspicion,
on the act there is no sign of argument [logical basis? Reasoning?], on the
procedure/scenario/scene nothing is being said about how it was carried out,

traces of the [sermo], the site, the time; no witness, no accomplice is being
named; the whole charge is brought forward out from a hostile, notorious, cruel,
sinful, lecherous house. Yet that house which is said to have been [tempto] in this
nefarious crime, is full of integrity, dignity, duty, solemnity; from which house
authority is being read to you, bound by sworn oath, so that the matter may be
placed on___ is scarcely to be doubted,
-

Comparison of the two houses: use in essay