Cicero's Letters

 Cicero's Letters

Cicero’s letters are a rich source of information about the late Roman Republic. Not only do they give an almost day-to-day account of the political machinations of the time, but they also offer a rare insight into the psychology and the inner workings of the family of one of the Republic’s greatest literary and political figures. It is through Cicero’s letters that we learn not just what was happening, but how these events affected the individuals involved. No one, it can be said, was more involved in or affected by the gradual collapse of the Republic than Cicero. What’s more, Cicero’s personal life was equally tumultuous during this period, a fact that his continued lamentations can attest to. It is this link between the public and private lives of Cicero, the almost simultaneous collapse of his beloved Res Publica and his adored familia that makes his story so compelling. And it is his letters, written with his customary wit, candour and sincerity that are the medium through which this drama is played out to us, over two thousand years later.

This essay will look at a selection of Cicero’s letters, addressed to his friend Atticus and his wife Terentia, and consider the ways that the dramatic political events of the late Republic affected Cicero and his family. The selection of letters covers the time period from 60 BCE-46 BCE. It will be argued that the political situation was a major contributor to the difficulties that occurred in Cicero’s private life. It must be noted that, due to the limits of this essay, there will be a considerable degree of assumed knowledge with regards to Roman life and politics in the late Republic.

In his letter to Atticus from Rome on January 20, 60BCE, we see Cicero at the height of his powers. His successful consulship of 63BCE had left him with a great degree of dignitas, a kind of social and political capital (Wilcox, 2005, 271-272), which allowed him to exert substantial political influence. In 62, he had purchased an extravagant and fashionable home (domus) on the Palatine, which acted as a physical reminder of the centrality and importance of his position in Rome (Hales, pp45). Cicero’s domus was also the scene of the morning salatatio, attended by his clientela, which amounted to “an open demonstration of a man’s position in the social hierarchy” (Saller, 1984, pp 352). The client/patron relationship was a fundamental part of Roman society, whose influence is complex and disputed (See Wallace-Hadrill 1989). For our purposes, this practice, commonly known as patronage, is perhaps best summed up by Everitt: “do ut des” or “I give so that you give” (Everitt, 2001, pp30). A notable side effect of this practice was the mixing of the public and private affairs of individuals; this is particularly notable in the case of the domus (Treggiari, 1998, pp03), a fact that was clearly a source of tension for Cicero:

My brilliant, worldly friendships may make a fine show in public, but in the home they are barren things. My house is crammed of a morning. I go down to the forum surrounded by droves of friends, but in all the multitude I cannot find one with whom I can pass an unguarded joke or fetch a private sigh (Ad Att., I, 18).

Cicero goes on to describe some of the political machinations occurring in 60 BCE. A staunch optimate and constitutionalist, Cicero expresses concern for the state of the Republic, describing it as in “heavy seas” (Ad Att., I, 18). In this, Cicero’s assessment is astute; however, it may be said that he fails to see the degree to which these “heavy seas” were about to affect him personally.

By 59 BCE, Cicero found himself in a politically vulnerable position. At this time three preeminent figures, Caesar, Pompey and Crassus, had set up what is commonly referred to as the first triumvirate (Tatum, 2010, pp. 199). Their combined influence allowed them to circumvent the senate, the traditional political authority in Rome, and pursue their own agendas. For Cicero, who was initially approached by Caesar to join the scheme but declined (Treggiari, 2007, pp56, Tatum, 2010, pp. 199), this was an unfortunate outcome. As a constitutionalist, Cicero could not support a scheme that “threatened to marginalise all other political actors” (Wiedemann, 1994, pp48). Furthermore, he saw the threat to the Republic that loomed in the figure of Caesar. In his letter to Atticus of January, 60BCE, he never mentions Caesar, but says of Pompey and Crassus that “they seem fools enough to expect to keep their fishponds after losing their constitutional freedom” (Ad Att., I, 18). This shows Cicero’s faith in the constitution, or at least his fear in losing its protection. But, more importantly, it is also a clear allusion to Caesar, whom he considered the most dangerous of his political rivals, a fact borne out by his exile in 58 BCE. This public action, taken by Clodius, Cicero’s “bitter enemy” (Tatum, 2010, pp198), who had the backing of Caesar, was to have devastating effects on the private life of Cicero.

Cicero’s exile, in effect, temporarily destroyed both his public and private lives. In Roman politics, to be out of the city, with the exception of a consul or proconsul, was to be completely powerless. Equally, to have been banished from Italy and separated from his family was personally devastating. In a letter written in Brindisi, April 29, 58BCE, the full effect of his imminent exile and love for his family is shown:

Good-bye, dear Terentia, best and most devoted of wives, and my darling little daughter, and Marcus, now our only hope. (Ad Fam., XIV, 04)

This letter is also notable for the way Cicero defers household decisions to Terentia, showing absolute faith in her ability to handle the family’s affairs. In the meantime Cicero was to use his private connections, including his daughter’s husband Piso, and his somewhat unreliable friend, Pompey, to secure his return to Rome. Clodius, meanwhile, realised that the removal of Cicero from Rome was not enough, and “having driven him out, Clodius burned down his house and built a temple to liberty on the site” (Plutarch, pp113). This act was what Hales calls the damnatio of the memoria of Cicero (2000, pp46), and aimed to obliterate his memory from the minds of the Roman populace. This example helps to illustrate the stakes in the public life of the Roman elite. The participants were not just vying for political survival but for the survival of their families and their legacies alike. The connection between the public and private was, in a sense, absolute.

Cicero managed to secure reinstatement to Rome. Upon his return, he fought not only for the resurrection of his political status, but for the return of his domus and for compensation for its destruction (Ad Att., IV, 01). Treggiari argues that there may have been tensions between Cicero and Terentia upon his return (2007, pp74). It is interesting to consider how Terentia, a “capable and formidable woman,” (Claassen, 1996, pp212) who was financially independent (Everitt, 2001, pp62), would find the adjustment from effective head of the domus, back to a position of complete subordination—in legal terms, at least. These kinds of tensions may have contributed to the eventual divorce of Cicero and Terentia in 47BCE.

 A similar situation occurred at the outbreak of civil war between Caesar and Pompey. Cicero chose to flee to Greece, following his political ally Pompey, again leaving his private affairs in a state of disarray and uncertainty:

My dear hearts, I think you should yet again carefully consider what you are to do—whether you should stay in Rome, or join with me, or seek some place of safety … (Ad Fam, XIV, 18)

Here again we see the ostensible care that Cicero showed his family and the trust he put in Terentia. However, these are simply his words; his actions, in leaving Italy, and his “general negligence of financial matters” (Treggiari, 2007, pp124), had serious ramifications for his family and their prospects. By 47 relations between Cicero and Terentia had soured, as shown in the famous last surviving letter of Cicero to his wife (Ad Fam, XIV, 20). 

The reasons for their divorce in 47 are unclear and disputed (Claassen, 1996, pp230, Tregiari, 2007, pp 130). Plutarch blames Terentia’s failing to support Cicero during his retreat to Greece with Pompey, and during his stay in Brundisim upon his return to Italy (Plutarch, pp129). There is also the possibility of a financial dispute between the two (Claassen, 1996, pp219). It seems reasonable, however, to assert that no matter what the specific reasons for divorce, Cicero’s public affairs, and the pressure that forced separations and civil strife put on Cicero and Terentia, contributed to the demise of their marriage.

It can be argued that there is clear evidence that the public life of Cicero dramatically impacted his private life. It was certainly a source of tension and strain on Cicero, who was fighting not only for his political position but for the welfare and position of his family as well. Additionally, the pressure of exile and civil war may well have contributed to the divorce of Cicero and Terentia in 47 BCE. 


Reference List

Primary Resources

Cicero, Epistulae ad Atticum, viewed at < https://sites.google.com/site/librariumdatabase/roman-sources/letters-and-correspondences/cicero/cicero---letters-and-correspondences>, viewed on 12/05/2013.

Cicero, Epistulae ad Familiares, viewed at <https://sites.google.com/site/librariumdatabase/roman-sources/letters-and-correspondences/cicero/cicero---letters-and-correspondences> ,viewed on 12/05/2013.

Plutarch, Cicero, Translated by J.L Moles, 1988, Aris & Phillips Ltd, Wiltshire.

Secondary Resources

Everitt, A, 2001, Cicero: The Life and Times of Rome’s Greatest Politician, Random House, NY.

Claassen, J, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage: The cas of Cicero and Terentia, Phoenix, Vol.50, No. 3/4, pp208-232.

Hales, S, 2000, At Home With Cicero, Greece & Rome, Second Series, Vol. 47, No. 01, pp. 44-55.

Saller, R, 1984, “Familia, Domus”, and the Roman Conception of the Family, Phoenix, Vol. 38, No. 04, pp. 336-355.

Tatum, J, 2010, The Final Crisis (69-44), in A Companion to the Roman Republic, Ed. Nathan Rosenstein & Robert Morstein-Marx, Blackwell Publishing, West Sussex UK.

Treggiari, S, 2007, Terentia, Tullia and Publilia: the Women of Cicero’s Family, Routledge, NY.

Treggiari, S, 1998, Home and Forum: Cicero between "Public" and "Private", Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-) , Vol. 128 pp. 1-23.

Wallace-Hadrill, A, 1989, Patronage in Ancient Society, Routledge, New York.

Wiedemann, T, 1994, Cicero and the End of the Roman Republic, Gerald Duckworth & Co, London.

Wilcox, A, 2005, Paternal Grief and the Public Eye: Cicero “Ad Familiares” 4.6, Phoenix, Vol. 59, No. 3/4, pp. 267-287.