November 8

This year on November 8 the United States will be electing the 45th person to hold the office of the presidency. Politics, is not new, nor are elections with dirty tricks, or personal attacks on the opposition candidate. Politics have probably been around as long as the human race has been able to communicate. Aristotle (384 BC to 322 BC) once wrote that human beings by nature are political animals. Our political nature, according to Aristotle, primarily comes from our ability to communicate certain moral concepts such as justice. To say that this presidential election has tested the national patience would be a vast understatement. To adjust from Thomas Paine: these are the times that try our souls. This makes me recall the famous beginning statement of Cicero's first attack on Catiline in 63 BC: "When, O Catiline, do you mean to cease abusing our patience?" The purpose of this piece is to not discuss the current election cycle, rather it is to discuss the events and circumstances surrounding what historians call the Catiline Conspiracy, and a few of the many similarities to current events.

Catiline

In the year 63 BC both Cicero and Catiline were near the top of the political hierarchy.  Cicero had some tremendous skills as an orator, which to his advantage that early November day in 63 BC.  Cicero was born into a wealthy landed family, not in Rome, but in a community about 70 miles north, Arpinum.  Even though born to wealth, Cicero's roots were surpassed in the amount of blue-blood by Catiline who counted among his ancestors one of the ancient mythical founders of the Eternal City.  In addition, Catiline's great grandfather was a hero of the wars against the man with the elephants--Hannibal.  However, from a political stand point Cicero was Counsel, at the time the highest position within the republic of Rome.  Showing that the favored blue-blood line, often thought to be a high advantage in Roman politics, had its limits Catiline had twice run for Counsel, but had been denied, most recently in that year of 63BC.

Cicero

The Counsel election between the two was testy, and even though Cicero was a "new man", that is not of the blue-blood stock that Catiline possessed. Catiline was hampered by his past which included an acquittal of violating a Vestal Virgin.  Cicero would go on to win the election with the backing of the rich and the powerful.  According to classical historian Mary Beard, the "Roman electoral system openly and unashamedly gave extra weight to the votes of the rich."  In the end, the powerful rich elites of Rome would see to the election of the new man. Control of a political system by the rich and the elites is not new, they put their interests first, as observed by Julian Assange.  The US system is less openly, but just as unashamedly, interested in promoting the political elites.  All Bernie Sanders desired was a level playing field, but interplay between the national media and the DNC would not provide such.  Democracy depends upon a free and independent media, (a fourth check and balance, if you will) but such exists in name only and certainly not in practice. 

Roman Curia Building.  Last rebuilt in 283 AD
1990 photo by author

What was different for Catiline?  Why did a blue-blood son of Rome fall?  While born into money, the economic times just prior to 63 BC left him with a great deal of debt, almost bankrupt. A Roman version of our great recession.  Perhaps he overextended on loans unable to pay them back due to economic rough times.  More likely, as reported, his two runs for Counsel would have required significant resources leaving him near bankrupt.  To reclaim his funds, and his honor, Catiline took on a very populist agenda, one that would seal his fate.  Not only did he promote cancellation of debt, but he wanted to put forth proscription of wealthy citizens into military service, and other items to champion the oppressed and the poor.  This would appeal to a wide arrange of Romans, but the vote of the underclass was not enough to overcome the extra weight given the rich.  As Beard says: "claiming that he was a down-and-out standing up for other down-and-outs could hardly have endeared him to the elite voters." Rich Romans were beginning to raise eye brows with their plush private houses, fitted with Greek sculpture and paintings.  They would not wish to their lifestyle challenged.  Less than one year ago former President Bill Clinton said in a speech that  lower income whites don't have anything to look forward to when they get up in the morning."  Catiline understood this about ancient Rome, and it would lead him to make a decision which in our 21st century mind we would find abhorrent, but was not uncommon, and would become more common in the years of the empire, rebellion and possibly murder.

Famous painting of Cicero's Oration.  Catiiline  sits alone.
It lacks historical accuracy in a number of ways.

Cicero, was one of two counsels, and believed a rebellion would lead to his death.  Cicero would find out about Catiline's potential adventure and with the oration provided by his experience as a lawyer, he would take to the Temple Jupiter before a crowd of 600 senators to lay out a case against Catiline.  Mixing fact, with fiction and innuendo, and adding theatrics, such as wearing a breast plate and entering with an armed guard, Cicero would make an argument against Catiline.  As a Rome slumlord, Cicero knew his fortunes would falter if Catiline were successful with his proposed reforms.  Catiline, who was in attendance as a senator, attempted to defend himself.  Realizing his fate, he would leave town that evening.  Catiline was not alone, he had garnered support not just among the poor and indigent, but also among others of the ruling class that had seen their fortunes decline.

Part of Roman Forum
1990 photo by author

Cicero would formulate a brilliant plot to weed these men out.  As Counsel, Cicero obtained from the senate powers to do what was necessary to protect the republic.  Today we would call these emergency powers.  In his methods, Cicero's actions would bring to the fore the question of what level of civil rights should be sacrificed for the good of the republic.  Over 2000 years later there is still not an answer as western democracies still struggle with this issue.  A number of Catiline's supporters were captured and within a month Cicero discussed what should be done with the men in custody.  Relying on the decree of emergency powers, and with support of some senators, Cicero had the men executed. Julius Caesar, would suggest that the men simply be imprisoned, a rather novel idea at the time since prisons were likely viewed only holding cells for an upcoming execution. Catiline would meet death leading forces against the Roman army in 62 BC.

The phrase has entered the popular lexicon

Typical of members of ruling class and their ever increasing levels of hubris, Cicero had the men executed without trial. In first century BC Rome the people made the laws, and elected (well sort of) the Counsels.  In 58 BC opponents of Cicero would argue that whatever the emergency powers granted to him, the executions of Catiline's followers deprived Roman citizens of a fundamental right--that being a fair trial. One could say it was Cicero's version of a drone strike.  Resentment to his actions peaked and Cicero was exiled for a year, and his main home destroyed.  The decline of his career would parallel the decline of the Roman Republic.  Cicero had supported Julius Caesar's rival Pompey, and after Caesar's assassination, he supported Brutus for Governor.   Within 20 years the Roman Republic would end, and following Caesar's assassination, leading to the rise of Augustus (Gaius Octavius).  Republics are fragile institutions dependant upon moral concepts of justice and right and wrong.  Whatever the outcome of this election, we can expect something similar to that by Cicero in 63 BC: "Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra".