Helvidius
Priscus came from the country town of Cluviae.
Tacitus
Still his tone
was that of an emperor, though he spoke of himself as a simple citizen
and gave his country all the glory. The senate for its part showed no
lack of deference. They decreed that Vespasian himself should be
consul with Titus for his colleague, and on Domitian they conferred
the praetorship with the powers of a consul. [240]
Mucianus had also addressed a letter to the senate which gave rise 4
to a good deal of talk. [241] If he were a private citizen, why adopt
the official tone? He could have expressed the same opinions a few
days later from his place in the House. Besides, his attack on
Vitellius came too late to prove his independence, and what seemed
particularly humiliating for the country and insulting to the emperor
was his boast that he had held the empire in the hollow of his hand,
and had given it to Vespasian. However, they concealed their ill-will
and made a great show of flattery, decreeing to Mucianus in the most
complimentary terms full triumphal honours, which were really given
him for his success against his fellow countrymen, though they trumped
up an expedition to Sarmatia as a pretext. [242] On Antonius Primus
they conferred the insignia of the consulship, and those of the
praetorship on Cornelius Fuscus and Arrius Varus. Then came the turn
of the gods: it was decided to restore the Capitol. These proposals
were all moved by the consul-designate, Valerius Asiaticus. [243] The
others signified assent by smiling and holding up their hands, though
a few, who were particularly distinguished, or especially practised in
the art of flattery, delivered set speeches. When it came to the turn
of Helvidius Priscus, the praetor-designate, he expressed himself in
terms which, while doing honour to a good emperor, were perfectly
frank and honest. [244] The senate showed their keen approval, and it
was this day which first won for him great disfavour and great
distinction.
Since I have had occasion to make a second allusion[245] to a man 5
whom I shall often have to mention again,[246] it may be well to give
here a brief account of his character and ideals, and of his fortune
in life.
Helvidius Priscus came from the country town of Cluviae. [247]
His father had been a senior centurion in the army. From his early
youth Helvidius devoted his great intellectual powers to the higher
studies, not as many people do, with the idea of using a philosopher's
reputation as a cloak for indolence,[248] but rather to fortify
himself against the caprice of fortune when he entered public life. He
became a follower of that school of philosophy[249] which holds that
honesty is the one good thing in life and sin the only evil, while
power and rank and other such external things, not being qualities of
character, are neither good nor bad. He had risen no higher than the
rank of quaestor when Paetus Thrasea chose him for his son-in-law,[250]
and of Thrasea's virtues he absorbed none so much as his independence.
As citizen, senator, husband, son-in-law, friend, in every sphere of
life he was thoroughly consistent, always showing contempt for money,
stubborn persistence in the right, and courage in the face of danger.
Some people thought him too ambitious, for even with philosophers 6
the passion for fame is often their last rag of infirmity. After
Thrasea's fall Helvidius was banished, but he returned to Rome under
Galba and proceeded to prosecute Eprius Marcellus,[251] who had
informed against his father-in-law. This attempt to secure a revenge,
as bold as it was just, divided the senate into two parties, for the
fall of Marcellus would involve the ruin of a whole army of similar
offenders. At first the struggle was full of recrimination, as the
famous speeches on either side testify; but after a while, finding
that Galba's attitude was doubtful and that many of the senators
begged him to desist, Helvidius dropped the prosecution. On his action
in this matter men's comments varied with their character, some
praising his moderation, others asking what had become of his
tenacity.
To return to the senate: at the same meeting at which they voted
powers to Vespasian they also decided to send a deputation to address
him. This gave rise to a sharp dispute between Helvidius Priscus and
Eprius Marcellus. The former thought the members of the deputation
ought to be nominated by magistrates acting under oath; Marcellus
demanded their selection by lot. The consul-designate had already 7
spoken in favour of the latter method, but Marcellus' motive was
personal vanity, for he was afraid that if others were chosen he
would seem slighted. Their exchange of views gradually grew into a
formal and acrimonious debate.
was that of an emperor, though he spoke of himself as a simple citizen
and gave his country all the glory. The senate for its part showed no
lack of deference. They decreed that Vespasian himself should be
consul with Titus for his colleague, and on Domitian they conferred
the praetorship with the powers of a consul. [240]
Mucianus had also addressed a letter to the senate which gave rise 4
to a good deal of talk. [241] If he were a private citizen, why adopt
the official tone? He could have expressed the same opinions a few
days later from his place in the House. Besides, his attack on
Vitellius came too late to prove his independence, and what seemed
particularly humiliating for the country and insulting to the emperor
was his boast that he had held the empire in the hollow of his hand,
and had given it to Vespasian. However, they concealed their ill-will
and made a great show of flattery, decreeing to Mucianus in the most
complimentary terms full triumphal honours, which were really given
him for his success against his fellow countrymen, though they trumped
up an expedition to Sarmatia as a pretext. [242] On Antonius Primus
they conferred the insignia of the consulship, and those of the
praetorship on Cornelius Fuscus and Arrius Varus. Then came the turn
of the gods: it was decided to restore the Capitol. These proposals
were all moved by the consul-designate, Valerius Asiaticus. [243] The
others signified assent by smiling and holding up their hands, though
a few, who were particularly distinguished, or especially practised in
the art of flattery, delivered set speeches. When it came to the turn
of Helvidius Priscus, the praetor-designate, he expressed himself in
terms which, while doing honour to a good emperor, were perfectly
frank and honest. [244] The senate showed their keen approval, and it
was this day which first won for him great disfavour and great
distinction.
Since I have had occasion to make a second allusion[245] to a man 5
whom I shall often have to mention again,[246] it may be well to give
here a brief account of his character and ideals, and of his fortune
in life.
Helvidius Priscus came from the country town of Cluviae. [247]
His father had been a senior centurion in the army. From his early
youth Helvidius devoted his great intellectual powers to the higher
studies, not as many people do, with the idea of using a philosopher's
reputation as a cloak for indolence,[248] but rather to fortify
himself against the caprice of fortune when he entered public life. He
became a follower of that school of philosophy[249] which holds that
honesty is the one good thing in life and sin the only evil, while
power and rank and other such external things, not being qualities of
character, are neither good nor bad. He had risen no higher than the
rank of quaestor when Paetus Thrasea chose him for his son-in-law,[250]
and of Thrasea's virtues he absorbed none so much as his independence.
As citizen, senator, husband, son-in-law, friend, in every sphere of
life he was thoroughly consistent, always showing contempt for money,
stubborn persistence in the right, and courage in the face of danger.
Some people thought him too ambitious, for even with philosophers 6
the passion for fame is often their last rag of infirmity. After
Thrasea's fall Helvidius was banished, but he returned to Rome under
Galba and proceeded to prosecute Eprius Marcellus,[251] who had
informed against his father-in-law. This attempt to secure a revenge,
as bold as it was just, divided the senate into two parties, for the
fall of Marcellus would involve the ruin of a whole army of similar
offenders. At first the struggle was full of recrimination, as the
famous speeches on either side testify; but after a while, finding
that Galba's attitude was doubtful and that many of the senators
begged him to desist, Helvidius dropped the prosecution. On his action
in this matter men's comments varied with their character, some
praising his moderation, others asking what had become of his
tenacity.
To return to the senate: at the same meeting at which they voted
powers to Vespasian they also decided to send a deputation to address
him. This gave rise to a sharp dispute between Helvidius Priscus and
Eprius Marcellus. The former thought the members of the deputation
ought to be nominated by magistrates acting under oath; Marcellus
demanded their selection by lot. The consul-designate had already 7
spoken in favour of the latter method, but Marcellus' motive was
personal vanity, for he was afraid that if others were chosen he
would seem slighted. Their exchange of views gradually grew into a
formal and acrimonious debate.
