FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1829   1830   1831   1832   1833   1834   1835   1836   1837   1838   1839   1840   1841   1842   1843   1844   1845   1846   1847   1848   1849   1850   1851   1852   1853  
1854   1855   1856   1857   1858   1859   1860   1861   1862   1863   1864   1865   1866   1867   1868   1869   1870   1871   1872   1873   1874   1875   1876   1877   1878   >>   >|  
rial itself. Humiliation of the Republicans The scheme for the revival of the censorship failed, because among the servile majority of the senate no one possessed sufficient moral courage and authority even to become a candidate for such an office. On the other hand Milo was condemned by the jurymen (8 April 702) and Cato's candidature for the consulship of 703was frustrated. The opposition of speeches and pamphlets received through the new judicial ordinance a blow from which it never recovered; the dreaded forensic eloquence was thereby driven from the field of politics, and thenceforth felt the restraints of monarchy. Opposition of course had not disappeared either from the minds of the great majority of the nation or even wholly from public life--to effect that end the popular elections, the jury-courts, and literature must have been not merely restricted, but annihilated. Indeed, in these very transactions themselves, Pompeius by his unskilfulness and perversity helped the republicans to gain even under his dictatorship several triumphs which he severely felt. The special measures, which the rulers took to strengthen their power, were of course officially characterized as enactments made in the interest of public tranquillity and order, and every burgess, who did not desire anarchy, was described as substantially concurring in them. But Pompeius pushed this transparent fiction so far, that instead of putting safe instruments into the special commission for the investigation of the last tumult, he chose the most respectable men of all parties, including even Cato, and applied his influence over the court essentially to maintain order, and to render it impossible for his adherents as well as for his opponents to indulge in the scenes of disturbance customary in the courts of this period. This neutrality of the regent was discernible in the judgments of the special court. The jurymen did not venture to acquit Milo himself; but most of the subordinate persons accused belonging to the party of the republican opposition were acquitted, while condemnation inexorably befell those who in the last riot had taken part for Clodius, or in other words for the regents, including not a few of Caesar's and of Pompeius' own most intimate friends--even Hypsaeus his candidate for the consulship, and the tribunes of the people Plancus and Rufus, who had directed the -emeute- in his interest. That Pompeius did not prevent
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1829   1830   1831   1832   1833   1834   1835   1836   1837   1838   1839   1840   1841   1842   1843   1844   1845   1846   1847   1848   1849   1850   1851   1852   1853  
1854   1855   1856   1857   1858   1859   1860   1861   1862   1863   1864   1865   1866   1867   1868   1869   1870   1871   1872   1873   1874   1875   1876   1877   1878   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Pompeius

 
special
 

jurymen

 

opposition

 

consulship

 

courts

 

interest

 

public

 

including

 

candidate


majority

 

tumult

 

parties

 

influence

 

respectable

 

applied

 

anarchy

 

substantially

 

concurring

 

desire


burgess

 

enactments

 

tranquillity

 

pushed

 

instruments

 

commission

 

putting

 

transparent

 
fiction
 

investigation


disturbance

 

Clodius

 
regents
 

condemnation

 

inexorably

 

befell

 

Caesar

 

directed

 

emeute

 

prevent


Plancus

 

people

 
intimate
 

friends

 

Hypsaeus

 
tribunes
 

acquitted

 

scenes

 

indulge

 
customary