and to bring the sinews of the body politic to the snapping point.
(Cf. Cic. Sest. 55.) Irresponsible violence, homicide if necessary,
were often the tasks and assignments of these bands. It is not
probable that these measures should have deceived anyone as
to their design. The virtual abolition of the censorial nota was a
measure by which Clodius virtually adjusted the Great Council
(deeply honey-combed with, and often leading in, the moral de-
pravity of the fashionable decadence) to the times. The pro-
gramme of the Claudian commoner, at least in its general outlines,
cannot have been concealed from Caesar and Pompey, when they
permitted his transition to the common people. The adoption of
these measures as plebiscita came in 58, and was greatly facilitated
by the consular agents and creatures of the dynasts, viz. by
Gabinius and Piso. One marvels at the impotence or apathy of
the senatorial class, though our surprise can never equal that of
the chief victim of Clodius. Cicero in fact was now rapidly ap-
proaching the catastrophe, which had been a dark and constant
cloud on the horizon of his political forecast since the Nones of
December, 63, and which his personal feud with Clodius had so
efficiently quickened and accelerated. The "Law" against Cic-
ero was distinctly retroactive. ¹ In the course of his agitation for
it Clodius had also called a contio outside of the walls, so that
Caesar, who was cum imperio, might address the commoners there.
( Dio, 38, 17.) Caesar condemned the illegality of the executions
of the Nones of December 63, but he declared himself as opposed
to retroactive punitive legislation in principle. This law however
was passed; it provided that whoever had caused the death of
Roman citizens without regular trial, "should be forbidden fire
and water," i. e. banished from all communion with his fellow citi-
zens. It was like an act of attainder; for the guilty one was de-
clared one who had forfeited everything but mere life. Formally
Cicero was not named. Actually it was as Cicero later called it
( Piso, 30) a tribune's proscription enacted by a personal enemy:
Cicero, who knew those earlier times, was reminded of the wanton
vindictiveness of Sulla. Cicero felt that the traditional preemi-
nence and primacy of the Senate itself fell, when he was struck
down: who will find fault with him for this identification? He
changed his garb, ² as did a goodly part of senate and knights, and
their retainers and dependents. He personally went about in

-205-