Cicero and the Word Popularis

Robin Seager

doi:10.1017/S0009838800042117

Cicero and the Word Popularis

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009

Robin Seager

Show author details

Robin Seager: Affiliation:
University of Liverpool

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

It has by now become a commonplace among the historians of the republic that optimates and populares were not political parties in any modern sense. Nevertheless the ghost of the ‘popular party’ still lingers in subtle disguises, the most insidious of which is donned whenever populares is translated as ‘the populares’, with all that the definite article may imply.

Type: Research Article
Information: The Classical Quarterly , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , December 1972 , pp. 328 - 338

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838800042117 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Classical Association 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

I am grateful to Mr. E. L. Bowie and Mr. J. J. Paterson for their criticisms of a draft of this paper.

^{page 328 note 1} In fact the plural of popularis is relatively rare, and in Cicero always refers not to a coherent group of politicians jointly active at any one time, but to a series of individuals. The only passage, to the best of my knowledge, in which populares are presented as a party or group alludes not to Rome but to Athens (Nep, . Phoc. 3. 1):Google Scholar ‘erant eo tempore Athenis duae factiones, quarum una populi causam agebat, altera optimatium … populares Polyperchonti fauebant, optimates cum Cassandro sentiebant.’ In Val. Max. 4. 1. 13, ‘Metellus populari factione patria pulsus’, the meaning ‘by a (or the) popularis faction’ is possible, but ‘by popularis intrigue’ perhaps more likely.

^{page 328 note 2} Detailed references to modern works have been kept to a minimum. The collection of material in the article by Meier, C. (RE Supp. 10, 549 ff.)Google Scholar is invaluable. Cf. also Rübeling, K., Untersuchungen zu den Popularen;Google ScholarMartin, J., Die Popularen in der Geschichte der späteren Republik;Google ScholarHellegouarc'h, J., Le Vocabulaire latin des relations et des partis politiques sous la rtpublique, 513 ff. References to ancient sources given without indication of author are to works of Cicero.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 3} Sest. 96 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 4} Cf. 2 Verr. 1. 151, Cluent. 73, 130, 136, Sest. 105, 140, Phil. 7. 4, Lael. 41, and for optimus quisque in this context Off. 1. 85.

^{page 328 note 5} Sest. 97.

^{page 328 note 6} Sest. 99. For madness, cf. Mil. 22, Brut. 273. Later in the year, when Cicero was forced to make a show of politeness toward Caesar, he was rather more moderate in his suggestions as to why a man might become popularis: ‘propter indignitatem suam diffisi ipsi sibi aut propter reliquorum obtrectationem ab huius ordinis coniunctione depulsi’ (Prov. cos. 38).

^{page 329 note 1} Sest. 98. Best of the innumerable discussions: Wirszubski, C. in J.R.S. xliv (1954), 1 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 2} Rab.perd. 17.

^{page 329 note 3} Sest. 114.

^{page 329 note 4} Har. resp. 43. For other hostile connotations of iactatio popularis, cf. Cluent. 95. In general, cf. also Sest. 140: ‘qui senatus consilium, qui auctoritatem bonorum, qui instituta maiorum neglexerunt et imperitae aut concitatae multitudini iucundi esse uoluerunt’. It was, however, not always by choice that populares rode roughshod over accepted forms, as is revealed by Cicero's boast in 56 (Fam. 1. 2. 4, cf. 1. 4. 2): ‘quod ad popularem rationem attinet, hoc uidemur esse consecuti, ut ne quid agi cum populo aut saluis auspiciis aut saluis legibus aut denique sine ui posset.’

^{page 329 note 5} Sest. 103, Auct. Her. 1. 21; cf. in general Flor. 2. 1. 7.

^{page 329 note 6} Leg. agr. 2. 10.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 7} Vir. ill. 73. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 8} Leg. agr. 2. 10.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 9} Lael. 41.

^{page 329 note 10} Prov. cos. 38 f.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 11} Phil. 11. 17.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 12} Lucull. 13.

^{page 329 note 13} Cluent. 77.

^{page 329 note 14} Red. sen. 20.

^{page 330 note 1} Leg. agr. 2. 70.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 2} Att. 8. 3. 5, cf. 8. 11D. 7.

^{page 330 note 3} Sall, . Cat. 38. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 4} Liv. 3. 39. 9.

^{page 330 note 5} Liv. 3. 55. 1.

^{page 330 note 6} Liv. 21. 63.

^{page 330 note 7} Liv. 8. 12. 14.

^{page 330 note 8} Ascon. 70.

^{page 330 note 9} Leg. 3. 35.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 10} Rep. 4. 8.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 11} Att. 2. 1.6.

^{page 330 note 12} Att. 1. 12. 1.

^{page 330 note 13} Fam. 9. 14. 7. There is the same hint of paradox in Livy's description (g. 33. 5) of an action as ‘non popularem magis quara iustam nee in uolgus quam optimo cuique gratiorem’.

^{page 330 note 14} Comm. pet. 5.

^{page 330 note 15} Tusc. i. 110. For further disparagement of fama popularis, cf. Tusc. 3. 4, 5. 46, Fin. 2. 48 ff. A similar contrast between optimi cuiusque and popularis laus in De or. 3. 117.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 16} Brut. 273.

^{page 330 note 17} Phil. 5. 49.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 1} Sest. 96.

^{page 331 note 2} Att. 2. 7. 2.

^{page 331 note 3} Har. resp. 44.

^{page 331 note 4} Sall, . B.J. 31.7, 42. 1.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 5} Liv. 3. 33. 7.

^{page 331 note 6} Liv. 6. 11. 7, cf. 6. 20. 3: ‘consensu opprimi popularem uirum, quod primus a patribus ad plebem defecisset’.

^{page 331 note 7} Liv. 21. 63.

^{page 331 note 8} Liv. 22. 34. 2.

^{page 331 note 9} Div. Caec. 8.

^{page 331 note 10} 2 Verr. 1. 151 f. A similar sense in a different context: Lig. 37.

^{page 331 note 11} Leg. agr. i. 23, cf. 2. io, where populare is an alternative to iucundum. Cf. Liv. 23. 4. 3: ‘litem …. quae magis popularis aptiorque in uolgus fauori conciliando esset’.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 12} Att. 10. 4. 8: ‘non uoluntate aut natura non esse crudelem, sed quod putaret popularem esse clementiam’.

^{page 331 note 13} Vat. 39: ‘praesertim cum popularem te uelis esse neque ulla re populo gratius facere possis’.

^{page 331 note 14} 2 Verr. 5. 163, Leg. agr. 2. 16, Rah. perd. 16, Dom. 77, 80.

^{page 331 note 15} 2 Verr. 5. 163, Rah. perd. 11 ff., Cat. 4. 10, Phil. i. 21, Lucull. 13, Liv. 3. 45. 8, 3. 53–6.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 16} Sest. 103 ff., Lucull. 13.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 17} But cf. Meier, , Res publico amissa, 117 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 18} Dom. 69, cf. Sest. 74.

^{page 332 note 1} Leg. 3. 27,Google ScholarRep. i. 42; in general, cf. Liv. 3. 39. 9.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 2} Rah. perd. 15.

^{page 332 note 3} Agrarian: Leg. agr. 1. 24, Sest. 103, Lucull. 13, Off. 2. 78, Liv. 2. 41 f., 6. 11. 8, Flor. 2. 1. 1; corn: Sest. 103, cf. s Verr. 3. 48, Flor. 2. 1. 1; colonies: Brut. 160.

^{page 332 note 4} Leg. agr. 2. 10.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 5} Leg. agr. 2. 63, cf. 2. 15. So too in Liv. 2. 42. 1: ‘dulcedo agrariae legis ipsa per se’; cf. 2. 42. 6 and the paradox in 2. 41. 7: ‘popularis iam esse dissuasor et intercessor legis agrariae coeperat’ (cf. Quint. 2. 16. 7).Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 6} Sest. 110. For largitio in general, cf. Leg. agr. 2. 10, 16, Dom. 47, Off. 2. 21, Auct. Her. 1. ai, Liv. 2. 41 f., 3. 1; defended: Off. 2. 58.

^{page 332 note 7} Leg. 3. 26; cf. 2 Verr. 5. 163, Caes. B.C. 1. 22. 5, above all Liv. 3. 45. 8, 3. 53–6.

^{page 332 note 8} Dom. 77; cf. the implication of Leg. agr. 2. 14 and 2. 70.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 9} Rab. perd. 12.

^{page 332 note 10} Leg. agr. 1. 25.

^{page 332 note 11} Liv. 2. 42. 6.

^{page 332 note 12} Liv. 3. 1; cf. 3. n. 7: ‘impetus tribunicios popularesque procellas’, 8. 12. 10 on Ti. Aemilius, and the antithesis implied in Leg. agr. 2. 14. In general, cf. Flor. 2. 1. 1.

^{page 332 note 13} Liv. 3. 37. 6.

^{page 332 note 14} 2 Corn. fr. 5, Rab. perd. 14, Sest. 37,103 ff., Dom. 24: ‘C. Gracchus, qui unus maxime popularis fuit’. For the application of the idea to a much earlier period, cf. Liv. 4. 54. 8 on the Icilii.

^{page 332 note 15} 2 Verr. 1. 151.

^{page 332 note 16} Sen, . Marc. 16. 4, cf. Flor. 2. 5. 6.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 17} Sall, . B.J. 31. 7; on Saturninus and the Gracchi, cf. Flor. 2. 4. 1 f.Google Scholar

^{page 333 note 1} Lucull. 13, with a long list of examples.

^{page 333 note 2} Att. 1. 19. 4; cf. Liv. 3. 64. 6 on L. Valerius and M. Horatius: ‘auctores populares sententiae haud popularis’.

^{page 333 note 3} Apart from the passages discussed below, cf. in general Leg. agr. 1. 25, 2. 43, Har. resp. 44.

^{page 333 note 4} 2 Verr. 3. 48. It is noteworthy that in this casual reference Cicero rejects by implication the idea of any automatic conflict of interest between people and senate.

^{page 333 note 5} Har. resp. 42.

^{page 333 note 6} Dom. 77.

^{page 333 note 7} Cic. ap. Ascon. 87; for Gratidianus, cf. Off. 3. 80 f.

^{page 333 note 8} Cf. De or. 3. 138 on Pericles.

^{page 333 note 9} 2 Verr. 1. 153.

^{page 333 note 10} Phil. 7. 4.Google Scholar

^{page 333 note 11} Fam. 12. 4. 1; cf. Ad Brut. 1. 3. 2: ‘popularem me esse in populi salute praeclarum est.’

^{page 333 note 12} Phil. 8. 19. So Cicero had spoken earlier of repelling ‘popularis impetus populari praesidio’ (Prov. cos. 41); cf. Dom. 69, Sest. 74 on his recall, and Sest. 140 on L. Opimius.Google Scholar

^{page 333 note 13} Leg. agr. 2. 7.Google Scholar

^{page 334 note 1} Cf. Red. sen. 20, Sest. 107; note also Florus' protest against the equation of plebs with populus on behalf of ‘possidentium … qui ipsi pars populi erant’ (2. 1. 7).

^{page 334 note 2} Cat. 4. g, cf. Schol. Gron. 289St.

^{page 334 note 3} Dom. 77; for the maiores, cf. the limiting case in Leg. agr. 2. 18.

^{page 334 note 4} Sest. 113 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 334 note 5} Att. 2. 20. 4, cf. 2. 19. 2.

^{page 334 note 6} Sest. 119–27.

^{page 334 note 7} Lael. 95 f.Google Scholar

^{page 334 note 8} Sest. 105, cf. 37 on Saturninus.Google Scholar

^{page 334 note 9} Sest. 109.

^{page 334 note 10} Leg. agr. 2. 6 f. Popularis consul is itself a paradox: the contrast between tribuni popularis and seuerissimi consulis in Liv. 3. 69. 1 expresses the natural assumption of hostility; cf. also Liv. 3. 11. 7: ‘uelut omnes dictaturas consulatusque gerens in uoce ac uiribus suis, unus impetus tribunicios popularesque procellas sustinebat.’Google Scholar

^{page 334 note 11} Leg. agr. i. 23.Google Scholar

^{page 334 note 12} Dom. 88.

^{page 335 note 1} Rab. perd. 15 f.Google Scholar

^{page 335 note 2} Rab. perd. 11 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 335 note 3} Dom. 77, 80.

^{page 335 note 4} Leg. agr. 2. 7.Google Scholar

^{page 335 note 5} Rab. Perd. 14.

^{page 335 note 6} Dom. 24.

^{page 335 note 7} Leg. agr. 2. 70; no doubt Rullus had merely been trying to make his law palatable to the optimates.Google Scholar

^{page 335 note 8} Leg. agr. i. 25.Google Scholar

^{page 335 note 9} Rab. perd. 12.

^{page 335 note 10} Dom. 77.

^{page 335 note 11} Cf. in general Mil. 72, Lael. 41, Sall, . B.J. 31. 7Google Scholar (Ti. Gracchus); Flor. 2. 4. 4 (Saturninus); Mil. 43 (Clodius); Vat. 19 (Vatinius). For Cassius, Maelius, Manlius, Licinius, and Sextius, cf. Dom. 101, Mil. 72, Phil. 2. 114, Cato 56, Liv. 4. 13 ff., 6. 14. 2, 6. 40 f.Google Scholar

^{page 335 note 12} Liv. 6. 19. 7; for the antithesis, cf. 2. 8. 1.

^{page 335 note 13} Leg. agr. 2. 15, cf. 1. 24, 2. 8, 32 ff., 43.Google Scholar

^{page 335 note 14} Leg. agr. 2. 16.Google Scholar

^{page 335 note 15} Flor. 2. 1. 1.

^{page 336 note 1} The list of optimate values: Sest. 98; attacked by Labienus: Rab. perd. 17; by the tribunes of 63 in general: Leg. agr. 2. 10; by Clodius: Sest. 114, Har. resp. 43; cf. also Sest. 140.Google Scholar

^{page 336 note 2} Fam. i. 2. 4, 1. 4. 2; cf. in general his remarks on the Aelian and Fufian laws (Red. sen. 11, Vat. 18).Google Scholar

^{page 336 note 3} Cf. Sest. 96.

^{page 336 note 4} Leg. agr. i. 23.Google Scholar Cicero had precursors: Valerius Potitus and Horatius Barbatus were ‘hominum concordiae causa sapienter popularium’ (Rep. 2. 54).

^{page 336 note 5} Leg. agr. i. 24.Google Scholar

^{page 336 note 6} Leg. agr. 2. 6 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 336 note 7} Leg. agr. 2. 10.Google Scholar

^{page 336 note 8} Leg. agr. 2. 102; there is no great significance in the variation between Concordia, libertas, and tranquillitas in the three versions of this programme.Google Scholar

^{page 336 note 9} Thus in general Phil. 7.4: ‘qui quondam propter leuitatem populares habebantur’. Cf. Yavetz, Z. in Atene e Roma x (1965), 97 ff.Google Scholar Leuitas is also characteristic of the multitudo and of contionatores (Mil. 22, Cat. 4. 9).

^{page 336 note 10} Brut. 103.

^{page 336 note 11} Phil. 5. 49.Google Scholar

^{page 336 note 12} Fam. 8. 6. 5.

^{page 336 note 13} Att. 2. 1. 6; for his own rejection of leuitas in that year, cf. Att. 1. 19. 8, 1. 20. 2.

^{page 336 note 14} Lael. 95; for grauitas, cf. Phil. 11. 17 on extraordinary commands.Google Scholar

^{page 336 note 15} Plane. 29; for blanditia, cf. Comm. pet. 41 f.Google Scholar

^{page 336 note 16} Sest. 139, cf. 141.

^{page 337 note 1} Cf. Cluent. 93 ff., 103, 113, 130, 136, Sest. 110, Lucull. 13, Rep. 4. n, De or. 2. 48, Schol. Gron. 289St.Google Scholar

^{page 337 note 2} Off. 1. 85.

^{page 337 note 3} Lael. 41.

^{page 337 note 4} Sest. 103; cf. App, . B.C. ii. 13.Google Scholar

^{page 337 note 5} Off. 2. 78.Google Scholar

^{page 337 note 6} Flor. 2. 11. 3.

^{page 337 note 7} Rep. 2. 59.

^{page 337 note 8} Leg. 3. 19.Google Scholar

^{page 337 note 9} Flor. 2. 1. 1. For the connection between sedition and tribunate in Livy, cf. 6. 11. 8: ‘agrariis legibus, quae materia semper tribunis plebi seditionum fuisset’.

^{page 337 note 10} Sall, . B.J. 31. 8. So for the hostile Florus this argument is only a pretext, though a plausible one: ‘quid tarn iustum enim quam recipere plebem sua a patribus?’ (2. 1.2); for his objections, cf. 2. 1.7.Google Scholar

^{page 337 note 11} Thus Sall, . B.J. 42. 1 of the Gracchi; in general, cf. e.g. Caes. B.C. 1. 22. 5, R.G. 1. 1.Google Scholar

^{page 338 note 1} Cf. for concitatio etc. e.g. Cluent. 93, 95, 136, Sest. 74, 109, 139 f., Sall, . Cat. 38. 1.Google Scholar

^{page 338 note 2} Like most political slogans, uindicare in libertatem could be exploited by both sides. Cicero comments on its availability (Rep. 1. 48): ‘et a regum et a patrum dominatione solere in libertatem rem populi uindicari’. So as soon as any popularis was accused of regnum he was vulnerable on this score; cf. Brut. 212 on Nasica: ‘ex dominatu Ti. Gracchi priuatus in libertatem rem publicam uindicauit.’

^{page 338 note 3} De or. i. 225, cf. Brut. 164.Google Scholar

^{page 338 note 4} Plut, . T.G. 14,Google Scholar cf. App, . B.C. i. 13.Google Scholar

^{page 338 note 5} Ascon. 58, 61.

^{page 338 note 6} Liv. 6. 41. 2.

Article contents

Cicero and the Word Popularis

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests