the point of honour was not liable to be touched in the controversies of society or of politics. To a Roman, abuse was mere words and wind, carrying no responsibility with it; neither did the man who uttered it suffer from loss of dignity, nor was the object of it under any obligation to clear his character.
Notwithstanding its sins against good taste, the speech against Vatinius has an interest of its own as illustrating Cicero's attitude towards Cæsar. He could hardly attack Cæsar's jackal without approaching dangerously near to the proconsul himself. When he inveighs against Vatinius for carrying laws in defiance of the auspices, do not his words reflect on Vatinius' master? Cicero will not allow his victim to associate his cause with that of Cæsar—"and that not only for the sake of the commonwealth, but for the sake of Cæsar, lest a stain from your despicable vileness should seem to rest on his worthy name. . . Suppose that Cæsar did break out into some excesses; that the strain of conflict, his ambitious aspirations, his pre-eminent genius, his exalted birth, did hurry him into acts, to which we could submit at the time from such a man, and which should now be blotted from our minds by his glorious services meanwhile; do you, rascal, dare to presume on the same forbearance? and shall we give ear to the voice of Vatinius, the pirate and the temple-robber, when he demands that the same privilege shall be extended to him as to Cæsar? "[1]
This argument was really sound, as regarded the past. Cæsar as consul had done fearful mischief to
- ↑ In Vat., 6, 15.
