Roman Civilization

CMS 206 /History 206

In 64, L. Julius Caesar and C. Marcius Figulus were consuls. During their consulship, the Senate issued decrees attempting further electoral reform and outlawing the collegia. Cotta was elected censor. It was an unusual honor, following immediately upon his consulship. Cotta's colleague is unknown. Both censors abdicated office after their efforts to reform the Senate were blocked by tribunes.

Catiline ran for the consulship in 64 in a field of candidates that included Cicero. Cicero, despite his status as a novus homo , came in first. Antonius was second, and Catiline a close third. (In Tog. Cand. 84) [Gruen, p. 137. Gruen suggests that the emphasis on Cicero's status has obscured the fact that he was a very strong candidate with backing in every order. Stockton, on the other hand, emphasizes that it had been decades since a novus homo had been elected consul, and never before had one been elected in the first year in which he was eligible. p. 71]. The elections for tribunes in 64 were unusual in that an apparently united slate of reforming tribunes had been elected.

The Senate in 64 continued the debate that had been raging since 67 over electoral reform laws and during part of that debate sought to increase penalties and add restrictions to campaign methods (e.g., limitation on the number of attendants who could accompany a candidate). The exact nature of senatorial proposals in 64 is not known, but whatever they were, they were vetoed by the tribune Q. Mucius Orestinus shortly before the 64 elections. [Marshall suggests that Orestinus vetoed the proposal because it "was an ad hominem measure directed at Catilina and Antonius." Bruce, A. Marshall, A Historical Commentary on Asconius (Columbia, 1985), p. 286, n. 83.9. Asconius suggests that Orestinus was acting for Catiline's benefit(In Tog. Cand. 76) and Cicero insinuates he did it for a price (In Tog. Cand. 79). If Catiline and Antonius had combined their campaigns as Asconius suggests (In Tog. Cand. 74), the combination itself might have given rise to Senatorial concern about election irregularities. Marshall, p. 284-285, n. 83.2]. Orestinus followed his veto with a speech attacking Cicero as unworthy for consular office because of his status as a novus homo. (In Tog. Cand. 76).

Cicero responded with his speech, In Toga Candida, which is scarcely concerned with the senatorial proposal. The fragments of the speech recorded in Asconius' commentary, instead, suggest that Cicero took the opportunity to level invective against his two most serious rivals, Catiline and Antonius, on the eve of the election.