Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 3.djvu/684

Rh 072 RUFUS. as Pompey did not venture to refuse to it his sanction. No sooner had his year of office expired than he accused his late colleague Q. Pompeius Rufiis of vis under the provisions of the very law which the latter had taken so active a part in passing. The triumvir, who had no further occasion for his services, rendered him but faint support. He was condemned, and retired to Bauli in Campania, where he was in great pecuniary difficulties, till Caelius generously compelled Cornelia, the mother of Pompeius, to surrender to him his paternal pro- perty. (Val. Max. iv. 2. § 7.) In B. c. 51, Cicero went to Cilicia as proconsul, much ag:iinst his will, and before leaving Italy he requested Caelius, who accompanied him on his journey as far as Cumae, to send him from time to time a detailed account of all the news of the tit}'. Caelius readily complied with his request, and his correspondence with his friend is still pre- served in the collection of Cicero's letters. In the s;ime year Caelius became a candidate for the curule aedileship, which he gained along with Octavius. As he was anxious to exhibit the games Avith becoming splendour, he applied to Cicero for money and for panthers, as his command of an Asiatic province would enable him to obtain a large supply of both without much difficulty. Cicero, with all his faults, did not plunder the pro- vincials. He therefore refused the money at once ; and does not seem to have put himself to much trouble to procure the panthers, although Caelius reminds him of them in almost every letter. During his aedileship in the following year (n. c. 50), Caelius still carried on his correspondence with Cicero ; and his letters contain some interest- ing accounts of the proceedings of the different parties at Rome immediately before the breaking out of the civil war. In the same year he became involved in a personal quarrel with the censor Ap. Claudius Pulcher, and with L. Domitius Aheno- barbus, who had been the colleague of Claudius in the consulship ; but we must refer the reader for particulars to his correspondence with Cicero {ad Fam. viii. 12, 14). Having thus become a per- sonal enemy of two of the most distinguished leaders of the aristocracy, his connection with this party, of which he had hitherto been a warm supporter, was naturally weakened. He felt no confidence in Pompey and the senate in the im- pending civil war ; he saw that Caesar was the stronger ; and avowing the principle that the more powerful party is to be joined when the struggle in a state comes to arms, he resolved to espouse the side of Caesar. In the discussions in the senate at the beginning of January, B. c. 49, Caelius supported the opinion of M. Calidius that Pompey ought to betake himself to his Spanish provinces in order to remove every pretext for war. By this declaration he openly broke with the aristocratical party, and in a few days afterwards he fled from Rome with M. Antonius, Q. Cassius, and C. Curio to Caesar's camp at Ravenna (Caes. B. C. i. 2 ; Dion Cass, xli. 2, 3). Caesar sent him into Liguria to sup- press an insurrection at Intemelium (ad Fam. viii. 15) ; and in April he accompanied Caesar in his campaign in Spain {ad Fam. viii. 16. § 4, 17- § 1). It is supposed by some modern writers that he also served under Curio in Africa in the course of the same year, as we read of a M. Rufus who was the quaestor of Curio in Afiica (Caes. D. C. il RUFUS. 43) ; but this M. Rufus must in all probability have been a different person. He was rewarded for his services by the praetor- ship, which he held in B.C. 48. But various causes had already alienated the mind of Caelius from his new patron, and these at length led him to engage in desperate enterprises which ended in his ruin and death. He was mortified that Caesar had en- trusted the honourable duties of the city praetor- ship to C. Trebonius rather than to himself, a dis- tinction, however, to which Trebonius had much greater claims, as he had in his tribuneship in B. c. 55 proposed the law for prolonging the pro- consuhir government of Caesar. But his chief dissatisfaction with the existing state of things arose from his enormous debts. It seems that he had looked forward to a proscription for the pay- ment of his creditors ; but as Caesar's generous conduct towards his opponents deprived him of this resource, he saw no remedy for his ruined for- tunes but a general commotion. Accordingly, when Trebonius was, in the exercise of his judicial duties, carrying into execution the law which had been lately passed by Caesar for the settlement of debts, Caelius set up his tribunal by the side of his colleague and promised his assistance to all who might appeal to him against the decision of the latter. But as no one availed himself of his prof- fered aid, he brought forward a law according to which debts were to be paid without interest in six instalments, probably at the interval of six months from one another.* When this measure was opposed by Servilius Isauricus, Caesar's colleague in the consulship, and by the other magistrates, he dropt it and brought forward two others in its place, which were in fact equivalent to a general confiscation of property. By one of these new laws the proprietors of houses had to give up a year's rent to their tenants, and by another cre- ditors were to forgive debtors all their debts. After such sweeping measures as these, the decisions of Trebonius, however lenient, would seem harsh to- wards debtors. A mob attacked him as he was ad- ministering justice ; several persons were wounded, and Trebonius himself driven from his tribunal. Thereupon the senate resolved to deprive Caelius of his office, and Servilius carried the decree into execution by breaking himself the curule seat of the praetor. Caelius saw that he could effect nothing more at Rome, and accordingly left the city, giving out that he intended to repair to Cafisar. But his real intention was to join Milo in Campania, whom he had secretly sent for from Massilia, and along with him to raise an insurrec- tion in favour of Pompey. Milo, however, was killed in an attack upon an obscure fort near Thurii before Caelius could join him [Milo] ; and Caelius himself was put to death shortly after- wards at Thurii by some Spanish and Gallic horse- men whom he was endeavouring to bribe to sur- render the place. (Caes. B. C. iii. 20 — 22 ; Diou Cass. xlii. 22—25 ; Appian, B. C. ii. 22 ; Liv. Epit. Ill ; Veil. Pat. ii. 68 ; Oros. vi. 15 ; Quin- til. vi. 3. § 25.) • The passage in Caesar {B. C. iii. 20), from which the statement in the text is taken, is cor- rupt: — "legem promulgavit, ut sexies seni dies sine usuris creditae pecuniae solvantur." Niebuhr conjectures sexies semestri die (Kleine Schrijien, vol. ii. pp. 253, 254.)