previous next
13. Independently of the general odium, one charge bore heavily on the accused; that Marcus Volscius Fictor, who some years before had been tribune of the people, had come forward as a witness: [2] “that not long after the pestilence had been in the city, he had fallen in with a party of young men rioting in the Suburra; that a scuffle arose there; and that his elder brother, not yet perfectly recovered from his illness, had fallen down almost dead, being struck with the fist by Caeso; that he was carried home between the hands of some persons, and that he considered that he died from that blow; and that it had not been permitted to him by the consuls of former years to follow up the matter.” [3] In consequence of Volscius vociferating these charges, the people became so excited, that Caeso was near being killed through the violence of the people. Virginius orders him to be seized and carried to prison. The patricians oppose force to force. Titus Quintius exclaims, “that a person for whom a day of trial for a capital offence has been appointed, and whose trial was now at hand, ought not to be outraged before trial and without sentence being passed.” [4] The tribune says, “that he would not inflict punishment1 on him before condemnation, that he would however keep him in prison until the day of trial; [p. 175]that the Roman people may have an opportunity of inflicting punishment on one who had killed a man.” The tribunes being appealed to, secure their prerogative by adopting a middle course;2 they forbid his being thrown into confinement, and [7] declare it to be their wish that the accused should appear on his trial, and that a sum of money should be promised to the people, in case he should not appear. How large a sum of money ought to be promised, came under discussion: that is referred to the senate. The accused was detained in the public assembly, until the patricians should be consulted: it was determined that he should give bail:3 each bail they bound to the amount of three thousand asses; how [8] many should be given, was left to the tribunes; they limited the number to ten; for ten sureties the prosecutor [9] discharged the accused. He was the first who gave public sureties. Being discharged from the forum, he went the following night into exile among the Etrurians. When on the day of trial it was pleaded that he had quitted his home in order to go into exile, Virginius notwithstanding holding the comitia, his colleagues when appealed to dismissed the assembly: the fine was rigorously exacted4 from the father; so [10??] that after selling all his effects, he lived for a considerable time in a solitary cottage on the other side of the Tiber, as if in exile. This trial and the proposing of the law gave full employment to the state: there was quiet from foreign arms.

1 Niebuhr denies that the tribunes had the power before the establishment of the decemviri to commit patricians to prison. See however Dion. vii. 17

2 In the original the words are, Medio decreto jus auxilii sui expediunt. The tribunes were afraid lest, if [5] they allowed Caeso to go entirely at large, the commons might become irritated; whilst if they refused to listen [6] to the application of a patrician when he craved their assistance, they feared lest they should lose an excellent opportunity of establishing their influence and increasing their power. By adopting a line of conduct then which conceded something both to the commons and to Caeso, they as it were extricate (expediunt) their power from this double danger.

3 Vadis publicos. According to Gronovius, publico, scil. plebi. Niebuhr prefers this reading.

4 Rigorously exacted. See Niebuhr ii. p. 289, who expresses a different opinion on the matter.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

load focus Notes (W. Weissenborn, H. J. Müller, 1898)
load focus Summary (Latin, W. Weissenborn, H. J. Müller, 1898)
load focus Summary (English, Benjamin Oliver Foster, Ph.D., 1922)
load focus Summary (Latin, Benjamin Oliver Foster, Ph.D., 1922)
load focus English (Rev. Canon Roberts, 1912)
load focus English (Benjamin Oliver Foster, Ph.D., 1922)
load focus Latin (W. Weissenborn, H. J. Müller, 1898)
load focus Latin (Robert Seymour Conway, Charles Flamstead Walters, 1914)
load focus Latin (Benjamin Oliver Foster, Ph.D., 1922)
hide References (48 total)
  • Commentary references to this page (11):
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 31-32, commentary, 31.44
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 33-34, commentary, 34.31
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 38.52
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 38.56
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 38.60
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 39-40, commentary, 39.13
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 39-40, commentary, 39.29
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 43-44, commentary, 43.16
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 43-44, commentary, 43.2
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, book 45, commentary, 45.36
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, book 45, commentary, 45.37
  • Cross-references to this page (16):
  • Cross-references in general dictionaries to this page (21):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: