Caesar. Life of a Colossus (Adrian Goldsworthy) Yale University Press (68 page)

379

XVIII

Blitzkrieg:

Italy and Spain,

Winter–Autumn, 49
BC

‘I ask, what is going on? What is happening? As for me I am in the dark. Someone says, “We hold Cingulum – we have lost Ancona; Labienus has deserted from Caesar.” Are we talking about a general of the Roman People or about Hannibal.. . . He claims that he is doing all this to protect his dignity. How can there be any dignity where there is no honesty?’ –
Cicero,
c
. 17–22 January 49 BC.
1

‘Let us see if in this way we can willingly win the support of all and gain a permanent victory, since through their cruelty others have been unable to escape hatred or make their victory lasting – save for Lucius Sulla, and I do not intend to imitate him. This is a new way of conquest, we grow strong through pity and generosity.’ –
Caesar, early March 49 BC.
2

At the beginning of the Civil War Caesar paraded the
Thirteenth
Legion and addressed the men. In his own account he tells us that he spoke of the injustices done to him by his enemies, and of how his old friend and ally Pompey, now jealous of his achievements, had been lured away to join them. Most of all the proconsul laid before the legionaries the contempt shown for the hallowed rights of the tribunes of the people, ignoring their right of veto

– something that not even Sulla had done. He did not dispute the Senate’s right to pass the
senatus consultum ultimum
, but denied that it had been necessary, and also made clear that it had never been used in similar circumstances, but only when Rome itself was under direct threat. Other sources tell us that to underline his point Caesar brought Antony and Cassius before the troops. They were still wearing the disguises in which they had fled from Rome, and the sight is said to have deeply moved the soldiers, first to 380

Blitzkrieg: Italy and Spain, Winter–Autumn, 49 bc

pity and then to anger against the men who had trampled on the college of magistrates first created to protect the ordinary citizens. By the time Caesar had finished, the legionaries were yelling out that they were ready to avenge the wrongs done both to him and to the tribunes. It is not clear whether this parade occurred in Ravenna or in Ariminum after crossing the Rubicon. What mattered most was the reaction of the troops. The
Thirteenth
had been formed by Caesar seven years earlier and had served with him ever since. The soldiers trusted him to bring them victory as he had always done in the past. They remembered his generosity with spoils, with praise and decorations. At some point he almost doubled the basic annual salary of a legionary, from 125 to 225 denarii. Many of the
Thirteenth
were probably from north of the Po, men officially with Latin status, but whom he had treated as full citizens. Their officers, both the half-dozen or so tribunes and the sixty centurions, all owed their commissions and subsequent promotions to him. Some may originally have been recommended to him by Pompey – all of these were allowed to leave unharmed and with all their possessions, if their conscience told them to honour their earlier loyalty. We are not told how many men chose to take advantage of this. All ranks – not just in the
Thirteenth
but throughout the entire army – had gained much from Caesar and could expect even more in the future, particularly plots of land for discharged veterans. A Senate dominated by Caesar’s opponents was unlikely to be generous in this regard. In this pragmatic sense the army in Gaul had a vested interest in Caesar’s victory, now that it had come to civil war. They knew and trusted their commander after serving together for so long, whereas few knew his opponents to any degree.

The loyalty of Caesar’s army throughout the Civil War – and indeed even after his death – was truly remarkable, but is all too easily taken for granted. Much of it was clearly the result of the bond between the general and his officers and men, which grew up during the campaigns in Gaul, as he carefully cultivated and rewarded them. Yet it would be wrong to see this as the whole story, or to deny that politics played any part at all. The officers in particular may have had fairly detailed knowledge of what had gone on in Rome. It seems reasonable to say that most of Caesar’s army came to believe that he

– and by extension they – had been treated shabbily by a group of senators whose own behaviour made it difficult to see them as the legitimate leaders of the Republic. For many Romans – wealthy and humble alike – there was a strong sentimental attachment to the tribunate. A sense of what was right, along with old loyalty and self-interest combined to ensure that Caesar’s army had no hesitation about fighting other Romans to set things right.3

381

CIVIL WAR AND DICTATORSHIP 49 – 44 BC

The choice of which side to join does not seem to have required much thought for the overwhelming majority of Caesar’s troops, but for most Romans it was very difficult. Only a small number of people were deeply committed by the time hostilities opened. Even some of those who might have appeared fervent partisans now took a step back. One was Caius Claudius Marcellus, who as consul in 50 BC had presented the sword to Pompey and called on him to defend the Republic. Now that civil war had come, he chose to remain neutral, perhaps thinking of his marriage to Caesar’s niece. Calpurnius Piso could not be expected to side against his son-in-law, but did not play an active part in the war, especially in the early months. Family ties and longstanding bonds of friendship played a major role in determining allegiance for many men, but in the small world of the Roman elite many men had links with the leaders on both sides and faced a very difficult decision. Most did not feel a strong commitment to either side, but memories of the struggle between Sulla and the Marians suggested that refusing to take part would not guarantee a man’s safety. Brutus, Servilia’s son, had studiously avoided ever speaking to Pompey, as he had executed Brutus’s father in 78 BC during Lepidus’ rebellion. Now he decided that his mother’s long-time lover was in the wrong and declared himself willing to serve under the command of his father’s killer. In part this was a matter of principle, but with his family connections there can have been little real doubt about his decision. He had been raised in Cato’s house and shared his uncle’s love of philosophy, while his wife was one of Appius Claudius’ daughters.4

There was one major defection from Caesar’s army when Labienus left him in the middle of January. His senior legate had served with him in Gaul from the very beginning and had proved himself to be by far the most gifted of his senior officers. Compared to the other legates, Labienus was granted a more prominent place in the
Commentaries
. Scholars have put forward the conjecture that Labienus held the praetorship before coming to Gaul, perhaps in 60 BC, but there is absolutely no evidence for this. If this is correct, then he would have been at least fifty years old by the time of the Civil War and thus had been eligible for the consulship for a considerable time. On Caesar’s behalf he had effectively postponed his own career for the duration of the campaigns in Gaul. As a legate he won some glory, although the lion’s share of this went always to the proconsul. Several of his independent operations, especially those against the rebellious tribes in 54–53 and 52 BC, would certainly have won him a triumph had Labienus been a provincial governor himself, instead of a subordinate. He had also become very rich during these campaigns, for Caesar was far more generous with money than he was with 382

Blitzkrieg: Italy and Spain, Winter–Autumn, 49 bc

glory. Cicero bemoaned the new-found wealth of Labienus. He may also have attracted the scorn of Catullus, if the theory is true that he was the
Mentula
–dick or dickhead – attacked in his poems. It is more than possible that Caesar intended further reward and hoped to have Labienus as his consular colleague in 48 BC. There seem to have been rumours about the senior legate’s loyalties as early as the summer of 50 BC, but Caesar had chosen to show his confidence in his subordinate by sending him to Cisalpine Gaul, near to Italy and therefore also nearer to hostile influences. In the event the gesture failed and Labienus went to join Caesar’s enemies. He may in fact have simply returned to an earlier loyalty, since he came from Picenum, a region dominated by Pompey’s family. Past service with Pompey has been conjectured, as well as support in his career. All of this is plausible enough, but personal dissatisfaction may have been just as important. Successful generals have throughout history tended to display supreme self-confidence, often combined with a readiness to denigrate the skill of others, and jealousy of other men’s fame – Napoleon’s marshals and the Allied senior commanders in the Second World War spring to mind, but many examples could be found. Labienus had given a large chunk of his best years to Caesar and seems to have felt that this had not been sufficiently recognised. On several occasions during the campaigns he may well have felt that it was his ability and deeds, and not Caesar’s, which had won the day. Our sources give the impression that he had an abrasive character and was by no means a likeable man. Resentment at having always to come second to another man, and the conviction that his real worth had not been recognised, may well have contributed to his decision. He may also have judged that Caesar was likely to lose the war, especially once the proconsul was deprived of his own talent. Hearing that Labienus had defected, Caesar decided on another gesture and gave instructions that all of his baggage should be sent after him.5

The prospect of gain and personal advantage from picking the right side were evidently important for many men faced with the prospect of war. As early as August 50 BC Cicero’s correspondent Caelius Rufus had expressed his own cynical view:

You won’t forget of course, that in a domestic squabble, carried on constitutionally and without resort to armed conflict, then men ought to espouse the more honourable cause; however, when it’s a war and the military camp, espouse the stronger, and hold the side to be best which is strongest. In all this strife I can see that Pompey will be backed 383

CIVIL WAR AND DICTATORSHIP 49 – 44 BC

by the Senate and the ‘lawyers’ – all those with plenty of fear and little hope will join Caesar, whose army is incomparably better.6

True to his word, Caelius joined the side with the better army rather than the one championed by most distinguished men and with the better cause. Not everyone agreed with his judgement on the balance of power. Caesar had ten legions, all veterans of the campaigns in Gaul, along with the equivalent of two more in the twenty-two independent cohorts raised in Transalpine Gaul, and auxiliaries and allies from Gaul and Germany. Losses to battle, accident and disease make it unlikely that any of the legions – especially the ones with longest service – had anything like their paper strength of soldiers. A generous estimate would give Caesar something like 45,000

legionaries at the beginning of 49 BC, but the figure could as easily have been as low as 30,000–35,000. Man for man these soldiers were better than any of the troops available to the enemy. There were the two legions that had been taken from Caesar and were now camped in southern Italy. One of these, the
First
, had on its formation taken an oath to Pompey, but the other – originally the
Fifteenth
, now renumbered the
Third
–had been raised by and for Caesar. Both units had served for three campaigns in Gaul. Pompey swiftly realised that the optimistic reports of their disaffection with their old commander were little more than a fantasy. For the moment at least, he did not feel confident enough to lead these men into battle against their former comrades and general. He did have seven fully formed and trained legions in the Spanish provinces, but these had little or no experience of actual warfare and so lacked the confidence Caesar’s men possessed after years of victory. Even more importantly they were far away, unable to play a part in the initial stages of the conflict. In the long term Pompey and his allies could call on far greater resources of manpower, money, animals and equipment than Caesar. A flood of recruits in all parts of Italy was confidently predicted, and with the consuls on their side they had access to the wealth of the State. Overseas, Pompey had clients and connections in Spain, North Africa and throughout the East, all of whom could be called upon to supply soldiers and contribute financially to the cause. It would take time to mobilise all these resources, to raise an army or armies, equip them and provide logistic support, as well as turning raw recruits into soldiers. One of the reasons why Pompey and his allies had adopted such an inflexible line in the months building up to the war was their absolute confidence that they possessed the military might to crush Caesar. On balance this was probably a fair assessment, as long as their opponent gave them time to prepare. 384

Blitzkrieg: Italy and Spain, Winter–Autumn, 49 bc

The Italian Campaign, January to March

The news that Caesar had crossed the Rubicon stunned his opponents. January was a difficult time to keep an army supplied in the field. In spite of earlier rumours, they may well have known that the bulk of his forces were still north of the Alps. It was probably also an indication that, even after passing the
senatus consultum ultimum
and beginning to mobilise, many of them really did expect him to back down in the face of their unity and obvious strength. Perhaps there was an assumption that he would wait for the campaigning season and carefully mass his forces before acting, maybe even remain on the defensive in the hope of continued negotiation. In the days following 7 January the Senate had convened on several occasions outside the boundary of the city, so that Pompey could reassure the senators. His father-in-law Metellus Scipio was given command of Syria, while Domitius Ahenobarbus was to go to Transalpine Gaul as proconsul. Caesar notes in the
Commentaries
that they did not deign to ratify all these appointments with a vote in the Popular Assembly in the usual way. However, both men did perform the normal ceremonies for a magistrate setting out for a command, and then rushed off to their provinces, as did the propraetors appointed to other commands. One of the latter was given Cisalpine Gaul. Caesar’s opponents had openly decided to make use of force against him, but they were not yet ready. Levies were underway, arms and equipment were being gathered, but by no stretch of the imagination could Italy have been described as prepared to meet an invasion. Caesar was not ready either, in the sense that he would surely have liked to have a stronger force at his immediate disposal before acting. He had sent orders to several other formations instructing them to move to join him, but they would not all arrive for some time. His opponents were still unprepared, and waiting would only give them a chance to grow stronger. Never one to delay unless this would bring him clear advantage, Caesar advanced with only the
Thirteenth
.7