Free Caesar by Allan Massie Page B

he was consumed with hatred.
    Why? Obvious reasons may be advanced. Cato once threatened to bring a prosecution against Caesar on account of atrocities committed in the conquest of Gaul. That threat certainly disturbed Caesar's vanity. No one, after all, was ever more careful of his reputation than Caesar. But of course he knew that the threat was empty. What happened in Gaul, horrible though it frequently was (I'm sorry, Artixes), was no worse than any other conquest. It is easy for people who never leave Rome or their country estates to preach morality; but you cannot subdue a proud people, and win Empire and glory for Rome, without harsh measures. Caesar was never afraid to take such measures, and on the whole his methods were justified. After all, even you must admit, Artixes, that Gaul was pacified, whatever has happened subsequently. Even that won't, I am certain, alter the fact that all Gaul is now incorporated within the Roman Empire, which Gauls themselves will eventually confess to be to their benefit. Civilisation cannot be spread amongst barbarians by the methods which appease the consciences of civilised men. To subdue barbarians inevitably requires a degree of barbarity.
    Besides, it was absurd of Cato to try to arraign Caesar on such a count. He never tired, after all, of talking about his great ancestor, Cato the Censor, and everyone knows the part he played in the spread of Empire. It was that model of Republican virtue who concluded every speech in the Senate, no matter what the ostensible subject of the debate, with the words: "and in my opinion Carthage must be destroyed". He didn't rest till that was done, not a stone left standing, and the people either massacred or sold into slavery. And yet his admiring grandson would have charged Caesar with war crimes. No wonder it gave Caesar such pleasure — malicious pleasure, I grant you — to found the city of Carthage anew.
    Cato's assumption of superior vi rtue infuriated Caesar, all the more because so many people accepted it unquestioningly. He thought him a hypocrite. He also considered that Cato not only failed to understand what Caesar called "the predicament of the Republic", but was an obstacle to others' comprehension.
    And then a personal element sharpened the hatred each felt for the other. Cato's half-sister was Servilia, who was, as I've remarked before, in my mother's opinion at least, the only woman Caesar ever really loved. When they were young Servilia is said to have dominated Cato who revered her as the very model of Roman womanhood. And then she submitted to the dissolute Caesar, with his dangerous Popular political attachments, and his connection with Gaius Marius — for an aunt of Caesar's had actually married the old brute. This was too much for Cato; he went about saying that his sister had been bewitched and also that it was a great mistake on the part of Sulla, when dictator, to allow himself to be persuaded to remove Caesar's name from the list of proscribed persons. He liked to quote Sulla's remark as he reluctantly spared Caesar: "In that young man I see many Mariuses."
    "Just so," Cato would say, as if this judgment represented the sum of political wisdom. So Cato hated Caesar on account of his debauchment of Servilia.
    There's actually rather a good story about this triangular relationship. During the debates in the Senate concerning the conspiracy of Catiline, Caesar and Cato were of course on different sides — indeed, you may remember that Caesar was actually suspected of involvement. Well, a note was passed to Caesar, and Cato leapt up and accused him of receiving messages from the enemies of the State. "I assure you, Conscript Fathers," Caesar said, "this note relates to a purely private matter." "Why should we accept the word of a liar who sympathises with Catiline?" Cato shouted. "I urge that Caesar be commanded to produce the note that we may all see what treasonable business he is engaged in."
    "Very well," Caesar