Caesar's Dignitas and the Outbreak of Civil War

J.S. Ruebel: Caesar's Dignitas and the Civil War133 Caesar's Dignitas and the Outbreak of Civil War1 James S. Ruebel Near the beginning of his account of the Civil War between himself and Pompey, Caesar wrote the famous sentence, sibi semper primam fuisse dignitatem vitaquepotiorem, "For him, dignitas had always been foremost, and more compelUng than life" (De Bello Civili 1.9.2). (We might call this Prosecution Exhibit A.) My purpose in this essay is to understand that sentence, and to put it into its cultural and literary context. This is not, fundamentally, a paper about whether Caesar was or was not an evil warmonger, a latent dictator, or not. It is fundamentally a paper about Uterary method. I am going to argue that Caesar did not—at any rate in his own book, the De Bello Civili—did not say, and did not mean, that his dignitas was more important to him than loyalty to the res publica, nor did he say or mean that defense of his dignitas was sufficient cause for civil war. These are both things that he has been made to say or mean by both ancient and modem writers. For some critics, Caesar's actions in January of 49 and later, when he became Dictator, provide die interpretive context for understanding his true meaning. J.M. Carter remarks, "it is significant for the understanding of Roman society that Caesar was able to advance such an intensely personal reason for his treason: he could with equal accuracy have claimed to be standing up for the right of all free inhabitants of Italy who were not of the narrow governing oligarchy to participate in the government of their country."2 Cicero, in a 1 The premise of this essay formed part of the argument of my textbook, Caesar and the Crisis ofthe Roman Republic (Oklahoma 1994) especially 58-9. A shorter form of the article was read at the 1994 meetings of the Classical Association of the Middle West and South; thanks to all who commented there. AU translations of ancient sources are my own. 2 J.M. Carter, Caesar: The Civil War, Books l&ll (London 1991) 166. 134Syllecta Classica 7 (1996) letter to Atticus written on 21 January, complains that Caesar has said that he is acting for the sake ofhis dignitas:3 Quaeso, quid est hoc? aut quid agitur? mihi enim tenebrae sunt. "Cingulum," inquit "nostenemus, Anconem amisimus; Labienus discessit a Caesare." utram de imperatore populi Romani an de Hannibale loquimur? o hominem amentem et miseram, qui ne timbrant quidem umquam t?? ?a??? viderit! atque haec ait omniafaceré se dignitatis causa. (Cicero, Epistulae ad Atticum 7.1 1.1 [January 21]) Please, what is this? Or what is happening? For I am completely blind. "We are holding Cingulum, we have lost Ancona, Labienus has left Caesar." Are we talking about a Roman general or about Hannibal? What a wretched madman, who has never seen even a shadow ofthe Good! And he says he is doing all this for the sake of his honor. By omnia, it is clear, Cicero means Caesar's capture of several northeastern Italian towns after crossing the Rubicon. In view of Caesar's own explicit statement, and in view of the overwhelming consensus of critics both ancient and modem, my thesis faces weighty obstacles; my argument will be further complicated by Caesar's additional statement, which might be considered Prosecution Exhibit B, in which he reports himself exhorting to the soldiers of the Thirteenth Legion before crossing the Rubicon: 2 Novum in rem publicam introductum exemplum queritur [Caesar], ut tribunicia intercessio armis notaretur atque opprimeretur, quae superioribus annis armis esset restituta; Sullam nudata omnibus rebus tribunicia potesate tarnen intercessionem liberam reliquisse, Pompeium, qui amissa restituisse videatur bona, etiam quae ante habuerint ademisse. ... 7 Hortatur, cuius imperatoris ductu Villi annis rem publicam felicissime gesserint plurimaque proelia secunda fecerint, omnem Galliam Germaniamque pacaverint, ut eius existimationem dignitatemque defendant. Conclamant legionis ???., quae aderat, milites—hanc enim initio tumultus evocaverat—sese paratos esse imperatoris sui tribunoramque plebis iniurias defenderé. (Caesar, De Bello Civili 1.7.2-3 and 7) Caesar complained that a new precedent had been introduced into the constitution, that...