movere me noluisti, tamen ita existimes velim me antelaturum fuisse, si ad me misisses, voluntatem tuam commodo meo. Ad ea, quae scripsisti, commodius equidem possem de singulis ad te rebus scribere, si M. Tullius, scriba meus, adesset: a quo mihi exploratum est in rationibus dumtaxat referendis-de ceteris rebus adfirmare non possum-nihil eum fecisse scientem quod esset contra aut rem aut existimationem tuam: dein, si rationum referendarum ius vetus et mos antiquus maneret, me relaturum rationes, nisi tecum pro coniunctione nostrae necessitudinis contulissem confecissemque, non fuisse. 2. Quod igitur fecissem ad urbem, si consuetudo pristina maneret, id, quoniam lege Iulia relinquere rationes in provincia necesse erat easdemque totidem verbis referre ad aerarium, feci in provincia; neque ita feci, ut te ad meum arbitrium adducerem, sed tribui tibi tantum, quantum me tribuisse numquam me paenitebit: totum enim scribam meum, quem tibi video nunc esse suspectum, tibi tradidi: tu ei M. Mindium fratrem tuum adiunxisti. Rationes confectae me Rufus to Cicero, in which he complained of various irregularities committed by Cicero, both in the haste with which he sent to the Treasury the public accounts without any interview with Rufus himself, and in the accounts themselves. We must remember that the quaestor was responsible to the State, so that the complaints of Rufus were not at all vexatious. 1. M. Tullius] A freedman of Cicero's. His full name was M. Tullius Laurea (Plin. H. N. xxxi. 7). Freedmen generaily took the prenomen and nomen of their master: cp. note on Att. iv. 15, 1 (143). dein] If looked at closely it seems somewhat hard to understand 'I can assure you' out of possum scribere; but the ellipse naturally supplies itself if we read the sentence rapidly. Wesenberg (Em. 68), following Martyni-Laguna, wishes to supply scito after dein. ius vetus] i.e. the old system in force prior to the Lex Julia, which ordered the accounts to be deposited in the two principal towns of the province as well as at Rome (see Addenda to vol. iii., p. 295). necessitudinis] For the close bond of relationship, almost that of father and son, which existed between the governor and his quaestor see Div. in Caecil. 61; Mayor on Phil. ii. 71. contulissem confecissemque] 'examined and settled' The con- refers probably to the comparing and balancing the debit and credit sides of the account. 2. ad urbem] 'before the city.' Cicero was waiting outside the city in hopes of obtaining a triumph. On the phrase cp. note to Fam. iii. 8, 1 (222). ut te ad meum arbitrium adducerem] 'my object was not to bring you over to what was my own individual judgment,' i. e. I did not endeavour, by thus making up and sending in my statement of accounts without an interview with you, to force you to alter your accounts so as to make them exactly tally with mine. The accounts of quaestor and governor ought to agree; and it might be thought that Cicero, by hastily sending in his accounts without having had any conference and discussion with Rufus, wished to hide certain discrepancies and irregularities in his own accounts and to force Rufus either to alter his accounts so as to bring them into harmony with Cicero's, or else to incur the scandal of a different presentation of accounts by quaestor and governor; in which case the quaestor would have the greater difficulty in establishing his honesty. M. Mindium] first cousin of Rufus. He was a banker at Elis in Greece and made Rufus his heir: Fam. xiii. 26, 2 (521). absente sunt tecum, ad quas ego nihil adhibui praeter lectionem : ita accepi librum a meo [servo] scriba, ut eundem acceperim a fratre tuo. Si honos is fuit, maiorem tibi habere non potui: si fides, maiorem tibi habui quam paene ipsi mihi: si providendum fuit ne quid aliter ac tibi et honestum et utile esset referretur, non habui cui potius id negotii darem quam cui dedi. Illud quidem certe factum est, quod lex iubebat, ut apud duas civitates, Laodiceensem et Apameensem, quae nobis maximae videbantur, quoniam ita necesse erat, rationes confectas collatasque deponeremus. Itaque huic loco primum respondeo, me, quamquam iustis de causis rationes referre properarim, tamen te exspectaturum fuisse, nisi in provincia relictas rationes pro relatis haberem ; quam cb rem... 3. De Volusio quod scribis, non est id rationum : docuerunt ita.... tuo] 'while I received a book of the accounts from my scribe, I also received a duplicate from your cousin': servo is certainly to be bracketed, for M. Tullius, as is proved by his very name, was a freedman and not a slave. quam cui dedi] This is the reading of Graevius, and so clear and certainly correct is it,' says that scholar, 'that not even Carneades could doubt of it.' In H T we find quam dedi; in M, quam darem, which Wesenberg (Em. 71) altered into quam quoi dederam. confectas collatasque] For the phrase see 1. The reading collatasque is found in T. In M it is consolatas (consolatasque H) whence the generally adopted reading is consolidatas balanced,' which is found in a Palatine мs and in all Lambinus's мss, possibly rightly: cp. Ascon. on 2 Verr. i. 92, p. 185 (on the word quadrarint). Solida facta sint ut neque plus quisquam neque minus inveniatur in summa: ubi enim ratio sine fraude est, difficile est sexcenta, detractis quadringentis, quadrare et solidari vel solida fieri, quin aut minus aut plus aliquid reperiatur.' Schmalz adopts consolidatas in Antibarbarus, p. 309. rationes referre] not deferre, as is read in the мss: see Reid on Arch. 11. 'The phrase deferre in aerarium (Balb. 63) is especially used of the beneficia [see § 7], while referre in aerarium is used of money and accounts.' pro relatis] Treasury.' as good as sent into the the beginning of a sentence which his been lost, or has somehow arisen from dittography of haberem. 3. De Volusio] The exceedingly perplexed events alluded to in this section and the next appear to be as follows:-Volu sius, one of Cicero's most trusted followers as we see from Att. v. 21, 6 (250), had made some contract with the State, perhaps to collect some branch of the revenue, but had made it on terms too advantageous to the State. He made the bargain nominally for himself, but really for a banker Valerius, who appeared in the transaction as a surety for Volusius. The praefectus fabrum and a legatus of Cicero became sureties for Valerius. When the loss had to be met, Valerius paid up a considerable sum, and paid it in a way conveying an acknowledgment that he was the purchaser of the contract. As regards the remainder of the money due, Valerius tried to transfer the obligation to Volusius; but Valerius, having acknowledged that he was purchaser and having paid a large sum as such, could not pass on the obligation up to Volusius, the obligation passed rather the other way down to the sureties of Valerius. These, as we have seen, were trusted officers and close friends of Cicero, so they had to be extricated from their difficulty some way or other. Cicero accordingly remitted the amount due, and entered the sum remitted in the accounts as arrears. He satisfied himself that the loss sustained by the State was no real loss, for the State had made too advantageous a bargain, and had enim me periti homines, in his cum omnium peritissimus tum mihi amicissimus, C. Camillus, ad Volusium traferri nomen a Valerio non potuisse, praedes Valerianos teneri. (Neque id erat HS xxx., ut scribis, sed HS XIX.) Erat enim curata nobis pecunia Valerii mancipis nomine, ex qua reliquum quod erat in rationibus rettuli. 4. Sed sic me et liberalitatis fructu privas et diligentiae et, quod minime tamen laboro, mediocris etiam prudentiae liberalitatis, quod mavis scribae mei beneficio quam meo legatum meum praefectumque [Q. Leptam] maxima calamitate levatos, cum praesertim non deberent esse obligati: diligentiae, quod existimas de tanto officio meo, tanto etiam periculo, nec scisse me quidquam nec cogitavisse, scribam, quidquid voluisset, cum id mihi ne recitavisset quidem, rettulisse: prudentiae, quod rem a me non insipienter excogitatam ne cogitatam quidem putas. We obtained what was a fair price in the sum non est id rationum] that has nothing Erat enim] It is Valerius and his sureties who are liable; for the money was paid us in the name of Valerius as the purchaser; the balance, or arrears, I have duly returned in my accounts.' Manceps is applied to purchasers of Statecontracts, Fest., p. 151, Müll. Manceps dicitur qui quid a populo emit conducitve, quia manu sublata significat se auctorem emptionis esse: qui idem praes dicitur quia tam debet praestare populo quod promisit quam is qui pro eo praes factus est'; also Ascon. on Div. in Caecil. § 33, p. 113. In rationes referre, to make an entry in the accounts'; in rationibus referre, to return to the Treasury in the accounts.' 4. Q.Leptam] As it is not in H this name is to be omitted. Rufus knew the persons who were involved in the whole transaction, so there was no necessity for Cicero to specify the names. Wesenberg (Em. 76) thinks that, so far from cutting out Q. Leptam, we should add M. Anneium after meum: cf. Att. v. 4, 2 (187). non deberent esse obligati] as being only praedes, not principals, in the transaction. Hence the sum for which they became liable is called multa below. periculo] We should have expected amicorum, or meorum, or something of the kind to have been added with this word. quod] so we read with Lamb., instead of MSS cum, both for the sake of symmetry (for quod is used after liberalitatis and diligentiae), and because cum would require the subjunctive. ne cogitatam] 'evinced no thought at all.' This is the admirable addition of the early editors. Rufus had attributed the whole remission to Cicero's scribe; and, in criticising the remission, said that it showed a complete absence of thought. Cicero now takes credit for the whole Nam et Volusii liberandi meum fuit consilium et, ut multa tam gravis Valerianis praedibus ipsique T. Mario depelleretur, a me inita ratio est quam quidem omnes non solum probant, sed etiam laudant, et, si verum scire vis, hoc uni scribae meo intellexi non nimium placere. Sed ego putavi esse viri boni, cum populus suum servaret, consulere fortunis tot vel amicorum vel civium. 5. Nam de Lucceio est ita actum, ut auctore Cn. Pompeio ista transaction, and says that Rufus has, to all intents and purposes, accused him of want of ordinary intelligence (prudentiae), for the plan had been most carefully thought out (excogitatam), and just the one person who was displeased at it was Cicero's scribe. For cogitare and excogitare contrasted, cp. Att. ix. 6, 7 (360). T. Mario] perhaps a surety of one of the sureties of Valerius. 5. The difficulty in this and the following section is that there are two sums of money, one deposited by Cicero's order and used by Pompey, another deposited by Rufus's order and used by Sestius: while both sums appear to be referred to as ista pecunia. The only explanation we can offer is that Sestius, who was on State service in Asia, took the latter sum for his own expenses, while he took over the former sum in trust for Pompey. This is probable, as Pompey had certainly not yet left Italy. As to the explanation of the whole passage, we offer the following with the greatest hesitation, leaving the ultimate interpretation, whatever it may be found to be, to better manuscripts or clearer insight for its establishment. At the direction of Pompey, Cicero had ordered a certain sum of money in dispute between one Lucceius and the State to be deposited in a temple. I acknowledge that I ordered it to be deposited,' says Cicero,' and that Pompey took that sum for State purposes, just as Sestius took a similar sum which you deposited. I am sorry I did not add that the sum was deposited by my orders, but I have no reason to deny it. The handing over of the money to Sestius was so very well authorized, and the documents in the transaction so formal and regular, that I never dreamed that there could be any difficulty in the matter, nor thought that it could affect you at all.' But why then did Rufus find any fault with Cicero ? The whole letter shows that the grievances of Rufus were not altogether imaginary: but this does seem to have been a somewhat trivial matter, and as being trivial, Cicero yields to the request of Rufus with a great deal of circumstance. The point appears to have been that odium naturally attached to the appropriating by the State of money not properly adjudicated upon; and Sestius and the other optimates (who were nothing if not rapacious) blamed Rufus for having deposited the money and thus having acknowledged that it was questionable whether it was State property while the money ought to have been simply appropriated in the first instance. That Pompey took money from the temples is stated by Caesar (Bell. Civ. i. 6, 8). Rufus indeed gave an order for its payment to Sestius; but he had never authorized the acknowledgment that this money in which Lucceius was concerned was in dispute, or was not the rightful property of the State. Cicero continues-The case is quite different about the HS 900,000 that entry was authorized by you, or at any rate by your cousin, so you should not evade the responsibility of it now. [The entry appears to have been to the debit of the Treasury.] But while in the former matter I, for my part, shall see what can be done to alter the accounts, you, on your part, certainly ought not in the account of money raised (or collected') to disagree so widely from my accounts already sent in-governor and quaestor ought not in their accounts to exhibit such a wide discrepancythough of course I may be in error. be assured I shall do everything I can for you. But Nam] For this use of nam, introducing a transition to a new subject, Manutius compares 6; also Fam. i. 9, 19 (153) Nam de Appio; Att. iii. 10, 2 (67); iii. 15, 2 (88). Still there is no doubt that iam would be more natural. pecunia in fano poneretur: id ego agnovi meo iussu esse factum: qua pecunia Pompeius est usus, ut illa, quam tu deposueras, Sestius. Sed haec ad te nihil intellego pertinere. Illud me non animadvertisse moleste ferrem, ut ascriberem te in fano pecuniam iussu meo deposuisse, nisi ista pecunia gravissimis esset certissimisque monimentis testata, cui data, quo senatus consulto, quibus tuis, quibus meis litteris P. Sestio tradita esset. Quae cum viderem tot vestigiis impressa, ut in iis errari non posset, non ascripsi id, quod tua nihil referebat. Ego tamen ascripsisse mallem, quoniam id te video desiderare. 6. Sicut scribis tibi id esse referendum, item ipse sentio, neque in eo quidquam a meis rationibus discrepabunt tuae. Addes enim tu meo iussu, quod ego, qui non addidi, nec causa est cur negem, nec si causa esset et tu nolles, negarem. Nam de HS nongentis milibus certe ita relatum est, ut tu sive frater tuus referri voluit. Sed, si quid est, quoniam de Lucceio parum provisum est, quod ego in rationibus referendis etiam nunc corrigere possim, de eo mihi, quoniam senatus consulto non sum usus, quid per leges liceat considerandum est. Te certe in pecuniam exactam ita referre ex meis rationibus in fano poneretur] For the lodgment of disputed money in a temple cp. Att. v. 21, 12 (250). Sestius] was prætor in 701 (53), and is said (Dict. Biogr.) to have been proprætor of Cilicia in 705 (49); but that is very unlikely, as he appears to have been in Italy and to have composed a manifesto for Pompeius in the spring of this year cp. Att. vii. 17, 2 (315). He was more probably sent out by Pompeius as a kind of commissioner to see after affairs in the East, and try to raise money for the aristocratic war-chest. In later times we find him sent to take command of some soldiers in Pontus (Bell. Afr. 34). animadvertisse ... ut] 'take care to': cp. Liv. iv. 45, 4, adverterent animos ne quid novi tumultus oreretur. 6. item] So we read with Wesenberg (Em. 76) for idem. The latter would have been right if quod, not sicut, had preceded. Addes] polite fut. for imperat. 'You will kindly add.' qui non] So HT, confirming the emendation of Wesenberg (Em. 76). The usual reading is that of M, quidem non. Lucceio] Most Mss give logaeo. H has legato, perhaps rightly. parum provisum est] This is the reading which is generally adopted. It is obtained from parum gravisum of M. senatus consulto] Cicero did not make use of a decree of the Senate which allowed him to hold back his accounts for a considerable time; on the contrary, he sent them in long before the necessary time, probably because he wished to have done with his province and all its affairs. We must now, says Cicero, see what the law allows us to do in the way of altering the accounts already sent in. It is not known to what senatus consultum Cicero is alluding. in pecuniam exactam] It is difficult to feel certain as to the correction of this passage. We have adopted that of Wesenberg (Em. 74), followed by Klotz: but it is harsh to translate ex meis rationibus relatis ' after my accounts are sent in,' as referre ex would certainly suggest entering from my accounts.' Still it is hard to suggest a less violent alteration of the мss reading which will give as good a sense. Could the reading be ista referre nongenta, i.e. IX, the numeral having been corrupted into EX? |