8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/claasen-documents-of-a-crumbling-marriage-the-case-of-cicero-and-terentia 1/26 Classical Association of Canada Documents of a Crumbling Marriage: The Case of Cicero and Terentia Author(s): Jo-Marie Claassen Source: Phoenix, Vol. 50, No. 3/4 (Autumn - Winter, 1996), pp. 208-232 Published by: Classical Association of Canada Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1192650 . Accessed: 08/04/2011 05:18 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cac . . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Classical Association of Canada is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Phoenix. http://www.jstor.org
Transcript
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
Documents of a Crumbling Marriage: The Case of Cicero and TerentiaAuthor(s): Jo-Marie ClaassenSource: Phoenix, Vol. 50, No. 3/4 (Autumn - Winter, 1996), pp. 208-232Published by: Classical Association of CanadaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1192650 .
Accessed: 08/04/2011 05:18
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cac. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Classical Association of Canada is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
CICERO'S PRIVATE LIFE as evidenced n his correspondence annotbe separatedfrom his political ife: at times eachpartseemsto work as a sort of counter-irritantto troubles in the other half. While his marriagewas still intact, it sometimesseemed to be all that saved the beleagueredconsular'ssanity. His divorceof
Terentia,his wife of overthirtyyears,andsubsequentmarriage o his youngwardPublilia n late 47 or early46 B.C. (at a time when Cicero'spoliticalcareer eemedat an impasse)has never been satisfactorilyaccounted for. Cicero divorcedthis
second wife soon after his daughterTullia's death in 45, becauseshe seemed
pleasedaboutit (Plut. Cic.41.8).1This divorce, oo, seemsodd, at the very east.
The purpose of this paper is threefold. First it will review the usuallycited evidence for the disintegrationof the marriageof Cicero and Terentia,
startingwith Plutarch,with a view to reinterpretingaspectsthat appear o have
been misconstruedby the ancient biographer,followed by moderns. Next theevidence to be found in Cicero's ettersrelatingto the couple's relationshipwillbe examined, so as to establishboth a psychologicalportrait of the family inthe
years immediatelyprecedingthe
divorce and, if possible, a picture of thedisintegrationprocess tself. Finally,modern standarddescriptors f marital trainwill be applied n an attemptto assessfactorsperhapspreviouslyunconsidered nthe Ciceronianmaritalbreakdown.
TRENDS IN INTERPRETATION
Relatively ittle attention has been paid to Cicero'sfamilylife by his modern
biographers:understandably, s there is so much material n his public life thatmerits attention. Cicero's authoritativebiographer, Elizabeth Rawson (1979:222), dismissesthe matterwith Therightsandwrongs of this unhappybusinessare irrecoverable. An article written in Polish (Pianko 1973) is not readilyaccessibleto most readers.Earlyin this centuryPetersson(1926: 206-208) wassatisfied o surmise hattherewas no reasonto assumethe marriagewasunhappy,but pointed out that Terentia'sfamily was nobler than Cicero's, and that shehad greaterfinancialresources.2 Gelzer (1939) confined himself to dates and
'Att. 12.32.2 refersto his having wanted o be alone for a while and notfeelingwell enough tosee Publilia, who hadgone backto hermother.The tone of the latter indicates hat he wasdesperate
to get clear of his youngwife, forwhateverreason.2Commenteduponby Fau (1978: 10). Her dowryamountedto 400,000 sestercescashand some
property.Cf. Gardner1986: 101. Petersson(1920: 518; with Tyrrell)suggeststhat the two merelydriftedapart.
208PHOENIX,VOL 50 (1996) 3-4.
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
facts. Little more is to be had from Cicero'sbest-known recentbiographers:on
Mitchell (1991) see below.
Apparentlyhereare few criticswho do not reada
processof
crumblingrom
the correspondence etween Ciceroand Terentia. But insufficientsourcematerial
is a problem, even if one also takes into considerationvariousoblique allusions
in letters to Atticus, some of which are open to variousinterpretations.Thereis no sign, for instance, of a final decree, similarto the one mentioned casually(in missives to Terentia Fam. 14.10 and 13) in connection with Tullia'sdivorce
from her third husband, the CaesarianDolabella, who apparently ll-treated
her. According to Roman custom, such a letter was obligatory. In the case
of Cicero and Terentia, we are in the position of friends of the husband,who
hardlyknow the wife, and tend, typically,to allocatepraiseor blame accordingto our interpretationof the husband's nterests. Most of these friends arekind,others less so. Jerome Carcopinonot only ascribedthe publicationof Cicero's
correspondenceduring the first years of the principateto an enemy (Augustushimself, no doubt), but criticizedstronglyCicero'severyaction, particularly is
manipulationof humanrelationships.3Most critics are satisfied to note that as the years progressedthe tone of
allusionsto Terentia in Cicero's etters to Atticus changed.Anxietyaboutmoneyand non-payment recurredwith greaterfrequency. Terentia was referred o as
being obstructive. t times she seemed to have becomeanotherof the problemsthat the kind friend had to sort out for the neuroticconsular.4Sometimes shefeaturedonly as ea or illa, or her actionswere hinted at in other, more obliqueways,usuallynegatively.In this, as in othermatters,Atticus appearedas Cicero's
only confidant. Yet some of the negative allusions may not necessarilybe to
Terentia.
The racy details of the apparently tartlingdivorce and remarriageare often
extrapolatedn worksdealingwith the status of women in the ancientworld,but
these canbe problematic.sTwo articles Dixon 1984, repr.1986, andCarp1981)discuss Terentia and Tullia's legal, financial,and familial status. Dixon arguesfor Terentia'ssuspecteddishonestyas the majorreasonfor the divorce.Balsdon
3Carcopino (1947, Eng. tr. 1951) discusses the letters pertaining to Terentia and Tullia
exhaustively n Chapter 3 of the first volume of his contentious book, with sections on Cicero's
manipulationof the interestsof his wife, children, and sons-in-law. Carcopinowas readingwithmodem eyes andjudgement, and his interpretations ometimesappearwillfullyerroneous,perhapsevenhis conclusion that such characteruicide couldonlyhavebeenassassination t the hands of an
enemy publisher.
4ShackletonBailey1965-70: vol. 1 Introduction,47, speculateson what returnAtticusexpectedfor all his multifarious ffices.
STreggiari(1991a: 42) points out that we know relatively ittle about causes and frequencyofdivorce n the ancientworld,and indicates(1991b:preface) hatwe havetoo little to go on in the caseof Ciceroand Terentia. Corbier(1991: 50-51) shows that a false symmetryobtained in attitudesto
remarriage y divorced men and divorcedwomen. Dixon (1992) consistentlycites the Cicerofamilyto makepoints aboutRomanfamily ife, withoutchallenging he prevalentpicture.
209
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
(1962: 46) is one of the few to give credit to Terentia for toleratingCicero for
the egoist that he was. He ascribes he divorceto Cicero's [obsession] hat she
was stealingfrom him. Only Fau (1978) ascribesanyvolition in the matterof
their divorce to Terentia herself, consideringthat Cicero'sfailure to live up to
the promiseof his consulatepromptedhis wife to goadhim towardsdivorceand
led her to subsequent remarriages.Fau'stheory has not been taken up in anymore recentpublications.Symein variouswritingsappears inallyto have laid to
rest the ancientmyth about Terentia'sreputedsecond and thirdmarriages,o the
historianSallust,and subsequently o the formerlyRepublican-mindedMessalla
Corvinus,who laterjoined the causeof Augustus.6
PLUTARCH:THE SOURCEOF THE CONFUSION
Cicero's erialbiographer,Thomas N. Mitchell, in his secondbook on Cicero's
public ife (1991: 273) ascribes he divorce o Terentia's generally nsympatheticattitude during his stay in Brundisium and Terentia's niggardly reatmentof
Tullia. This is a dear referenceto Plutarch Cic. 41.2-6, which is generally
interpretedas being based on information left by Cicero'seditor, Tiro. Judith
Hallett, in her otherwise excellent book on Roman fathers and daughters 1984:
140), erroneously nterpretsthis stay n Brundisium s a referenceto Cicero's
return rom exile in 57. It actuallyrefersto his returnafter the defeat of Pompey,nineyears ater.The confusionmayalreadyhave beenpresent n Plutarch'smind:
hence his allusionto Cicero'sdaughteras a younggirl (paidiske)at the time,
hardlyan appropriateepithet for the then thirty-odd-year-old,thrice-married
Tullia.7
Plutarch ets out hisexplanationdearly:Cicerohad beenneglectedbyTerentia,he had been left with no provisionsfor the journey, she did not come to him
when he tarried at Brindisi on his return after Pompey'sdefeat, she did send
their daughter,but without the appropriateescort or expenses,8she incurred
largedebts, and she strippedand emptied Cicero's house of everything.9ThesePlutarchconsiders he more respectable easons or the divorce.The others that
he quotesareCicero's infatuation with his wardPublilia),andworse, a desire
to recouphis financesby securingthe money he held in trust,which had to be
paidover as Publilia'sdowryon hermarriage.
6Syme'sfirstcomment(Sallust1964: 284) is quoted by Rowland(1968), who plausibly uggests
that the youngsecondwife, Publilia,mayhave been the serialwife in question,as she almostcertainlywasthe (unnamed)widow who marriedVibiusRufus,cos.suff. A.D. 16, Dio 57.15.6.
badly byher mother,but Cicero'swordsin the first etterlayblameon himself (meaculpa)and in the
second are not at all explicit. From Att. 11.17, writtentwo months later, on Tullia's return to her
mother,one must deduce a good relationship,also implicitin the discussionby Dixon (1988:210).9Informationgenerally mputedto Tiro, butpatentlyerroneous,Dixon 1988:231, n. 40. Gardner
(1986:89) comments that [it]soundslike the gleaningsof gossip among theirsocialcircle.
210 PHOENIX
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
Some of Plutarch'sassertions n Cic.41 areverifiablynaccurate:Terentiadid
not come to Brindisi n November 48 because Cicero told her not to come (Fam.
14.12).Tullia arrived here
quitesafelyand
happily(Fam. 14.11,Att. 11.17), andstayedwith her father or some time (Att. 11.19). Ciceroappears o havedivorced
Terentia long before he decided to remarryat the instigationof friends. It was
some time before he decided on Publilia. The second marriagedearly was an
afterthought,and not the causeof the divorce.10
MONEY
Plutarch'sassertion about monetary differences requires investigation. Heseems to takeforgranted he conceptof marriagepartners' qualresponsibilityor
mutualsupport,as he reportswithout comment the idea of Terentia's neglectof Cicero. It is clearthatTerentia,as the more affluentpartner andapparentlythe bettermanager),alwaysdid exerta greatdeal of influence on her frequently
impecunious spouse, even aiding him beyond what Roman custom expectedofan affluentwife.12 Cicero likedwealth and the propertiesmoney couldbuyhim.
He delighted in Terentia'sfarm,which became his by virtue of her dowry.13Tenure and securityof propertyownershipwere all-importantto him.14 Butthe usualinterpretationof earlyfinancialdashes betweenthe two does not quitehold waterwhen references
givenbythose of Cicero's standard
biographerswhofollowPlutarch's ead areexamined.After Cicero'sreturn rom exile in 57, he didrefertwice,guardedly, o troubleshe did not like to mention moreexplicitly Att.4.1.8, 4.2.7). But these couldhave been anything,even matters rom the couple's
conjugalcouch, not necessarily inancial. After his return Cicero was patentlyshort of resources,as he admitted nAtt. 4.3.6, but the domestic roubles intedat in the previous wo lettersmayhave been something else entirely.He did not
say.Mitchell (1991: 160, n.54) interpretsan allusion in Fam. 14.1.5 (November
58) to Terentia'sselling some propertyduring her straitenedcircumstancesasthe wife of a relegatus s the reason for Cicero's hints of troublein these threeletters. The letter to Terentia, however, merely expostulatedmildly that if she
10Att.12.11 is frankabout the appearance f anotherproposedcandidate:nihilvidifoedius.11Terentiawas expectedto help to providefor their son as well: Dixon 1988: 69, n. 21 on Att.
15.20.4.
12Dixon (1984=1986: 105) cites Terentia'smonetary independenceto illustrate the strictly
compartmentalized iew of familyobligationand matrimonialproperty as] verydifferentfromourown.
13See Corbett 1930:202 on the husband'susufructof dotalproperty,Claassen1992 on his effortsto regainhis propertyafterexile. Cf. Strasburger931:61.
4It is perhaps significantthat Cicero'sHortensius written in the winter of 46-45, apparentlyduringthe time that he was undergoingdivorceand remarriage), f which some hundredfragmentssurvive, eems to havestartedwith a discussionof the meaningof wealth. Cf. Straume-Zimmermann1976: 231 and MacKendrick1989: 106 on Cicero'srealizationthat deificationof Tullia couldworkas a tax-hedge.
211
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
sold her land to help him, there would be nothing left for the children. Cicero
was fearfulfor the future fortunes of little Marcus, for whom his mother was
clearlyexpectedto provide.A previous etter had
expressedhusbandly
contrition
at his part n Terentia'sproblems,andconcernthat she might perhaps ose her all
for his sake(Fam. 14.4.3, April 58). We should remember hat his interdiction
from fire and water technically dissolved their marriage. If Cicero's propertywere to be confiscated,Terentia'sdowry,normallydue to her in the event of the
dissolution of the marriage,could not be repaid.It was thereforeimportant hatshe retainwhatever she had. Suspicionthat she would be robbingher son of his
just inheritancecannotbe read from this exchange.The propertyseems after all
to haveremainedsecure.When, duringthe darkdaysafterTullia'sdeath,Cicero
advisedAtticus to payhis son'sexpensesfromrents,15he mayhave been referringto income from this property.In sum, both Cicero and Terentia in Plut. Cic. 41 appearas victims of a bad
press.Terentia comes out slightlybetterthan her husbandwith regard o mutual
support. That she enjoyed politics is clear from her readyparticipation n her
husband'spublicdutiesduringhis consulate.PlutarchquotesCicero'sownwords,in connection with the punishment of the Catilinarians: She was not a mild
sort, nor without daring n her naturegenerally,but an ambitiouswoman and ...she took a greatershare of his politicalworries from him than she gave him of
her household worries Cic. 20.3, tr. Moles). In similarvein, Plutarch ascribesCicero's animosity towardsClodius after the Bona Dea scandal to Terentia's
jealousyabout a relationship hat she suspectedbetween her husbandand Clodia
(Cic. 29.2).
TOWARDS A NEW INTERPRETATION
Terentia never was the idealized, virtually nvisible, good Roman wife, a
self-effacingprolifera nd lanigera.Even on the evidence of Plutarch,she appears
to have been a capableand formidablewoman. Cicero trustedherjudgement,and many of the extant letters refer to business arrangementsmade by her.16
She was dearly not as shrewishas the unfortunateQuintus Cicero'sPomponia.In that case, the brothers-in-lawon each side, Marcus Cicero and PomponiusAtticus, appear o havebeen called in frequently o smooth things overbetweenthe warringspouses.In the often mentionedAtt. 5.1.3-4, May 50, Cicerodetailsone such scene of maritalstrife, in termswhich suggest that he was unused tosimilarwranglingwithin his own household.17Yet it was the marriage f Terentia
5Att. 12.32. See Evans 1991: 108, Dixon 1984=1986.
16Plut. Cic.20. Cf. Evans 1991: 84-85 and Petersson1920: 277. Dixon (1984=1986) uses theletters as a case study to show the degreeof financialindependenceobtainingbetween spouses inRomanmarriage inemanu.
17Cf. Hallett 1984:230. Earlier etters(notablyAtt.1.6 and1.8)portrayMarcusCicero as anxiousthat Quintusshoulddo right by the sister(andmother)of his friend.
212 PHOENIX
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
andMarcus that failedfirst,and the intriguingquestionremainswhy this shouldhavehappened.
If at least some of Plutarch'spremisesareinadequate,what otherresourcesdowe have? The last ten yearshave seen a veritableexplosionin women's studies,
including comparativestudies of marriagecustoms, and of the legal status ofwomen in the ancientworld. Certaincritics'namesfrequently ecur.To quoteeachwork in the context of the Cicero-Terentiadivorcewould be redundant. f these
criticsarerelyingon Plutarch,or if theyareinterpreting he correspondencen the
light of his assertions, heremaybe a needforreinterpretation, erhapsbyrecourseto generalfamily studies. Modern sociologicalobservationsabout the causes ofmarital issureare, however,not wholly appropriate, s the verynatureof Roman
marriage,andconsequently,of divorce,was so vastlydifferent rom the modern.18The system of family financingworked differently,and, consequently,the lawsand customs regulatingownershipand inheritanceare scarcelycomparable. InRome continuance of marriagedepended not on cohabitation, but on affectiomaritalis.19 This should not be read as conjugalaffection but as thementalattitude or determinationo be married.
We may neverthelesssearch for common ground in the sphere of affect.Both Treggiari(1991b: 229-253) and Dixon (1992: 83-90, 1991) arguefor the
prevalence f what areoftenconsidered o be modern concepts,such asaffection
and the sentimental view of the family in the Roman world. There is enoughancientevidence for such sentiment, even in Cicero'sown letters.20A manwhoso unashamedly aid bare his all-too-humanegoism to a somewhatdisapprovingposterity,not keeping back the most abjectof his laments duringexile, may beconstrued as being equally honest in his emotion, or lack of emotion, in his
dealingswith his wife.21If familyjoys and sorrowsaffectedCicero as fatherand
husband,we maybe sureto find them reflected n his letters. It is thereforenot
unjustified o tryto interpret he Ciceronianfamily ife in termsof moderncriteriafor
familyhappiness. 22In the earlyyears,and, in fact, until nearly he end of their marriage, ontraryto most interpretations, here are clearsigns of both affection and the required
18Dixon (1992: 1-35) traces the debate, but arguesfor greatersimilaritiesof affect than aresometimesacknowledged.Cf. Treggiari 1991a:41-46).
4.19, 6.4, 6.7, 7.5, 8.10, 8.11, 10.120-121, Musonius Rufus fr. 13A Lutz, beside all the evidenceadducedby Dixon andTreggiari(1991b:257-259). Manson (1983: 153) refersto the increasinguse
of words of affect from Cicero onwards. Hallett's(1984: 230) argumentthat Roman men did notexpectmuchemotionalsupportfromtheirwives is basedpartlyon her erroneousreadingof Plutarchas denoting a lapse of nine yearsbefore Cicero reacted to Terentia's neglect -at best a circular
argument.21See Claassen1992: 26-31, alsoTreggiari1991b:253-255 on obviousaffection n the letters to
his wife.
22Cf. Bradley1991: 84.
213
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
determinationo remainmarried. 23o illustrate his, we can turn to the letters
for evidence of manycrisessuccessfullyweathered,but also to search or possible
changesn attitudeover time.
THE LE'I1'ERSAS SOURCE
The stem Terentia- appearssome 92 times in Cicero'scorpus,24of which
seven are adjectival,and irrelevanthere.25 Twenty-four letters in Fam. 14 are
addressed o Terentia, rangingin date from the time of Cicero'sexile down to
47 B.C.,when Cicero was coweringat Brundisium, n the aftermathof Pharsalus.
These areveryfew lettersin all. We have none of hers.We know that shewrote
often.
Manyof his letters arerepliesor acknowledgements.We know that they
were oftenphysicallyapart:duringhis exile,duringhis time in Cilicia,duringthe
periodof oppositionto Caesar.
EmotionallyCicero andTerentiaappear o havebeen closestduringhis exile:
the first four letters of Book 14 attest to that. As criticsrepeatedly ediscoverand
often hold againsthim, Cicero the man couldhandle adversity arless ablythan
could Cicero the philosopher,and the letters of the time reflect his misery. But
these could not have been all the letters addressed o his wife duringeighteenmonths of exile. Many must have been lost, perhapssuppressed,as being either
unimportant,or, perhaps, oo personal.26In Cicero'sprivatecorrespondencewith Atticus, his wife's namecropsup quite
frequently, orty-fourtimes in all, in forty different etters, the first a charmingannouncementof the birth of a little boy, Terentia alva(Att. 1.2.1). Often the
husband uses some form of third person allusion. Ea (or, in the oblique cases,
gender-indeterminate ius and ei), aswell as the third-person-singular nding of
the verb,sometimesclearlyalludesto Terentia,but sometimes seemsambiguous.In the whole of the collection of Cicero's ettersto and fromfamilyandfriends,Terentia is referred o by name in letters to anotheronly twice (Fam. 5.6, 16.11),
in the context of greetingsfromCicero'sfamily,includinghis wife, to Tiro, both
duringthe beloved freedman's llness. There is one other allusion to her in the
collection. In Fam. 9.9 (May 48) Tullia's third husband, Dolabella, comments
on a reportof the illness of his mother-in-law, before launching into political
persuasion,perhapson Caesar'snstructions.27
23Cf. Treggiari1991a:33. Elsewhere(1991b: 120) she suggeststhat the divorcefollowed lossof
harmony which the coupleat first dealt withby avoidingeach other.
24Read from: PackardHumanities Institute 1991: PHI CD ROM no. 5.3. Latin Texts: Bible
Versions. os Altos, Ca.25Two refer to the Lex Terentia(both in AgainstVerres),nd four areadjectives rom Terentius
Afer.26 t is impossible o ascertainwhetherthis wasfortuitousor conscioussuppression yan authorized
editor,Cicero's reedman,Tiro. See Bradley1991: 88 on the closeness of the relationship.27So ShackletonBailey, Comm.ad loc. This was at a time when the parentswerealreadyworried
about theirdaughter'sreatmentat the hands of the writer.
214 PHOENIX
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
Close attention to those letters to Atticus which span the same time as theletters to Terentia mayreveala patternof conjugalrelationshipslightlydifferent
from thepattern
discernible n thescraps
of one-sided communicationbetweenthe spouses that we have. Exactlyhalf these letters had a wholly positive tonein referringto his wife; many were no more than a wife's friendly greetings
relayedby a fond husbandto a valuedfriend.28Friendlycommunicationbetween
the members of the Ciceronian nuclearfamily peaksverydearlyfromCicero's
letters n the earlyyears.29LittleMarcus,the appleof his father'seye,sentallkinds
of playful greetings to Atticusthe Athenian in Greek30 In the years58-57,
during Cicero'sexile, Terentia and the children were much in his thoughts, as
the objectsof fatherlyand conjugalconcern,his brotherQuintusevenmore so.31
It would be reading more into the letters than is warrantedto give a negativeinterpretation o the fact that Cicero only once, duringhis exile, exhorted his
brotherto takecare of Terentia(Q.fr. 1.3.10).
THE TONE OF THE LETTERS TO TERENTIA
Terentia'sname of courseoccurs n the Salutatioof each ofthe lettersaddressed
to her.We have fourlong, virtual love ettersfrom the exilicera,chronologicallythe earliest n the extantcorpusFam. 14.1-4, April to November58), addressedto the
family,but
reallyaimed at Terentia alone. At least once
againin each of
the four exilic letters her name was repeatedwith the addition of further terms
of endearment. The conventions of Roman epistolographywere scrupulouslyfollowed in these long letters, but even the shortest notes of lateryears carried
some abbreviationof the standard formal greeting.32 I have treated of theromantic aspectsof the exilic lettersextensivelyelsewhere(Claassen1992). Of
importancehere is a practicalmatter.At the time of his exile,as so often,Terentiaacted as Cicero'sagent, managinghis affairs n Rome. He wrote to remindherthat their slaves should be consideredmanumitted,in the event of a final crash
and consequentconfiscations.The slaveswould remaintheirproperty f allwentwell (Fam. 14.4.4).
During Cicero'stour of duty in Cilicia, the matter of Tullia'sthird marriage(to Dolabella)was apparentlydecided independentlyby the two women, to the
slight discomfortof thepaterfamilias,who was in the processof negotiationaboutanother candidate. He gave way with good grace, however, and the parents'relationshipremained sound.33A lettergiving details of his journeyhome, and
29Att.1.18.1, quotedbyDixon (1992:29), referred o time spentwithwife andchildrenasCicero'sonlypleasurewhen his brotherandAtticus wereaway.
30Att.2.9.4, 2.12.4, 2.15.4.31See Claassen1992 for references.Bradley n Rawson(1991: 94-95) suggeststhat duringhis
exile Ciceroappeared o show moreconcernforQuintusthanfor his nuclearfamily.320n epistolographic onventionssee Cotton 1984, Lanham1975, Plasberg1926, Peter 1901.
33Fam.3.12.2, Att. 6.6.1. Cf. Dixon 1992:50.
215
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
thanking his wife for letters detailing some practicalarrangements,also ended
on a loving note: measuavissima t optatissimaTerentiaet Tulliola(Fam. 14.5.2,October
50).Two lettersto Atticus fromJanuary49 reveal the same easy communication
that had characterized he marriageto date. Playful punning by Atticus (Att.
7.13) on the namesof the financiersorbankers, he Oppii,Atticus'neighboursonthe Quirinal,had takensome interpretation.When Cicero at last understood he
joke, he told his friend that the explanationagreedwith Terentia'sinterpretation(Att. 7.13a.1). It is dear that the spouseshad discussed this trivialmatter in the
courseof normal,friendlyconversation.
In February49, the letterswritten to his familyon two consecutivedaysstill
containedendearments, f which the secondwas directed n equalmeasure o wifeanddaughter,duabus nimissuis(Fam. 14.14). It would be an idle quibble o note
that the first(Fam. 14.18) calledonlyTullia sweet. Now followed the time of
politicalturmoilafter Caesar'scrossingof the Rubicon.As the yearswent on, the
lettersto Terentia becamebriefer andbriefer,degenerating o mere notes, their
contentsmoreformal,and their tone perhapsmorecool, but it is difficultto read
conjugalaffectioncan takeshort note-writing. Politics and familyconcernsmayhave dictatedtheir
brevity.
In Fam. 14.16 the husband
explained
that he wrote
whenever a messengerwas available,whether he had any news or not. In manylettersthe frequent ormulaicabbreviationor the already ormulaicSitu vales,ego
quoque aleo in order:Fam. 14.17, 16, 21, 24 and22), may appearabrupt,but can
be read n the contextof hastybut comfortable ntercourseof a relaxedkind,with
affection takenfor granted.It should be noted that most of the letters to Atticus
written at this time (late49 to mid 47 ) were not much longer,andwere equally
guarded n tone. During Cicero's exile in 58 the firstdespairingnotes written to
Atticus afterhe fled Rome had been equallybrief. A similardespairmaybe read
here.There may, however,be anotherreasonfor brevityin the notes to his wife:
emotional strain occasioned by their daughterTullia's changing fortunes andindifferenthealth. More than a yearseparated wo letters. The first andlongerletter, fromJune 49, was optimistic and public n the sense that politics fillthe consular'shorizon. Cicerosometimesappearedextremely rresponsiblen his
treatment of his familyin the firstheady daysof Republicanresistance.He had
waveredaboutjoining Pompey,but eventuallynot even the tearsof Terentia and
Tullia couldprevailon him to stay.In his first etterhome, writtenon boardship
at Caieta,he soundedbuoyant,like a schoolboy eaving everythingbehind to goon holiday.His depressionhad passedafter a bilious attack:Cholen kratonnoctu
eieci,he wrote (Fam. 14.7).34 He did not reallyaddress his family'sfears, butascribed o the bilious attackhis apparentlyprevious ll humour(vergingperhapson the neurotic),forwhich he now was suitablyapologetic.
The expedition was calamitous, and by the end of the year Cicero was
languishingat Brindisi,awaitingCaesar'spardonbefore he could return o Rome.
He wasjoined
thereby
hisdaughter.
The second note (Fam.14.6, July 48)reflected a profoundchange both in Cicero'spolitical fortunes and in Tullia's
domestic situation.It wasfilledwith concern orTullia, andexpressed he father's
gratitudefor the mother's efforts on her behalf.35 Here the shortness of the
salutationseems to denote haste.36 ShackletonBailey ad loc.comments on the
uncordiality f this letter to Terentia, written at the same time as Att. 11.4,which is, however,equallycurt. The politicalsituation of the time, and Cicero's
growingdisillusionwith Pompey, aswell as anxietyabout the next instalmentof
Tullia'sdowrydue to Dolabella,couldhave been the common factorsprompting
the abrupttone of both letters, which appear deliberatelycryptic about bothpolitics andpersonalmatters.The next note to Terentia(Fam. 14.12, November
4, 48) referredguardedly o the writer'sunhappinessat injuries one him by his
family probably he defectionof his brotherQuintusto the Caesariancause).The ending of Cicero and Terentia'smarriagecannot reallybe considered
separatelyfrom both parents'concern over Tullia's far more obvious marital
break-up.Both parentshad for some time been increasinglyworried abouttheir
lawwas also a valuedmember of Caesar'scoterie,whom the beleagueredparentscould not reallyaffordto antagonize.37 ome of his carefulnessof expressionand
ambiguityof reference n lettersto Atticus during49 and 48 were explainedbyCiceroas dueto fearof interception Att. 10.18, May 49, and 11.2, March48). Asimilarsituation,relatingmoredirectly o Dolabella andTullia,andconsequently
onlyobliquely o Caesar,mayhavecontinuedto obtain,prompting he somewhat
crypticstyleof some the letters.38
At this time Cicero did not take Terentia into his full confidenceon other
familymatterseither.Planswere made for
youngMarcusto go to Caesar.Thesewere somewhathigh-handedlyannounced(in the first person plural)and thencancelled(Fam. 14.11 and 15, both June 47). This maybe ascribed o the usual
authoritywielded by a Romanpatetfamilias,but we have seen the Cicerofamilyas different,and havenoted Terentia'searlierauthority.39Circumspectioncouldhave servedto shield Terentia'sfortune in the event of a financialdisaster,as
ignoranceof her husband'splanswould havegiven her a certainprotectionfrom
35Terentiahad apparentlyried to sell some of her property o pay the next instalmentof Tullia's
dowry.Dixon (1984=1986:104) shows thatapplication o a motherwas unusual n Romancontext,
andconsiders he thanksveryformal,as if to a familyfriend.36Consideredby ShackletonBailey Comm. d loc.to be genuine. Fora negativeviewof the letter,
see Dixon 1984=1986:104.
37Althoughextremelydubious aboutDolabellaand consideringundertakingdivorceproceedingson Tullia'sbehalf,Ciceropaidup the secondinstalmentof her dowry n 48, Att. 11.2, 11.25.
38E.g., Fam.14.10 andFam. 14.13.
39See Hallett 1984:29-30, n. 46 on the debateon the realandapparentpowerof Roman womenas it relates to Terentia,also68, esp. n. 8.
217
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
accusationsof complicity. Cicero did not give her much in the way of politicalnews either. Political developments, including Caesar'spardon, were briefly
reported(Fam.14.23 and
24),but the burden of each letter is concernabout
Tullia'saffairs.
THE ROLE OF PHILOTIMUS
Thus, while CicerowaswaitingforCaesar'spermission o return o Rome,after
Pompey'sdefeat, Terentia was treated as a trustedsupportin financialmatters.
She in her turn entrusted the practicalrunning of her affairsto a freedman
steward,one Philotimus.40A letterofJanuary 8 B.C.(Att. 11.1) is takenby some
to indicatesevere criticism of Terentia.41Ciceroreferred o himself as credensi,cui scisiampridemmenimiumcredere.. The pronounei, being in the dativecase,
unfortunately ives no indication of gender.Yet earlier n the letter he hadbeen
complainingabout qui eas(his affairs)dispensavit,where the masculine relative
is usuallytaken to refer to Philotimus, who had apparentlygone missing. His
name is inserted n Winstedt's translation.ShackletonBailey,Comm. dloc.more
carefullysuggests perhapsPhilotimus, but does not negate the interpretationof Corradus,whom he quotes as thinking that Terentia was meant, explainingthat ei suited her better than Philotimus, of whose dishonesty Cicero had
convincedhimself two and a halfyearsbefore. This is of course true.Att. 6.5.1of June 50 B.C. had containeda request, carefullyphrased n Greek, that Atticus
go into the possibilitythat the freedmancould havebeen lining his pocketsfromMilo's estate. ShackletonBaileyadloc. hereforediscountsthe presentallusionas
also referring o Philotimus. I cannotsee why.42On at least one other occasion,Cicero had uttered doubts aboutPhilotimus. For example,at Att. 7.1.9.6, March
49, he coined the first of his sarcasticnicknamesfor Philotimus, calling him
a merusphurates,germanusLartidius,with the implication that he was sly and
underhand.43Hisopinion
did notimprove
overtime. In July or August 46,
long after the fateful splitwith his brotherand nephew, the two Quinti, Cicero
waxedsarcasticaboutyoung QuintusandPhilotimus both being enrolledamongthe enlargedcollege of Luperci (Att. 12.5). This would imply a vacillation n
political allegiancein Philotimus, who would have (along with the Quinti), atleast temporarily,oined Caesar'scamp,and hadlateragainchangedsides. AtAtt.
12.44.3, May 45, a contemptuous Favoniaster abadcopyof Favonius) uggeststhat Philotimus'ardentrepublicanisms upstartpretension.
40Tobe distinguished romCicero'sown librarian, lso Philotimus(Att.10.7.2, 13.33.1).41Assumedto indicate Cicero'suncoveringof Terentia'sdishonestinterference n his affairs by
Dixon (1984=1986:103).42It couldby no meanshave been an obliqueallusion to Quintus,whosedefection became known
a fullyear ater.43
Quint. Inst. Or. 6.3.96: ut Ciceron Lartium,hominemcallidumet versutum. Cf. Shackleton
Bailey, Comm. t Att. 9.7.6: Cicerobelieved P. to be a swindler.
218 PHOENIX
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
Cicero's etters of January o June 48 (Att. 11.1 to 4a) all touched on Tullia's
dowry and the payment of the second instalment. There were also hints that
Tulliawasunhappy,
and that a divorcemight
be imminent. Somemoney
seemed
to have gone missing and Philotimus was not to be found.44ShackletonBailey
argues or Terentia'scomplicity,on the strengthof Cicero'suse of thewordinuriis
(11.2.8) as [too]strong o refer o Philotimus. He interpretsa letterto Terentia
(Fam. 14.6), roughlycontemporaneouswith Att. 11.4, as cool, ut we haveseen
abovethat this letter expressedgratitude or the mother's care of their daughter.Its brevitymaybe ascribed o politicalcircumspection.Dolabella,the one personwho hadcearly inflictedinjuryon the familythroughhis treatmentof Tullia,was
a Caesarianwho must still be conciliated.
InJune47, ayear ater,the questionof Terentia'swillwas firstmooted. Cicerowanted Terentia to finalize her will, for the sake of those to whom she owes
it (ut satisfaciat quibusdebeat,Att. 11.16.5), that is, presumably,her children,not himself. A Romanwoman who was sui iurishad controlof her own money,but the Roman law of intestacydid not apply to women: their offspringwere
not considered their natural heirs. A will had to be made.45 The interests
of young Marcus and the unfortunateTullia needed safeguardingn an official
document. Here critics pounce on one of the only truly negative comments
madeby Cicero aboutTerentia until long after the divorce.Philotimuswas once
more involved. Cicero sounded dubiousabout Terentia'sgood intentions, andreferred o so-called deviousmachinations, iving no directproof of such, but
discussinga reportby Philotimussceleratequaedamfacere, hich he questioned.46There were other, later allusions to Terentia herself in the letters to Atticus
which continued to attest to a warm relationship. On July5, 47 Cicero asked
Atticus to sell what he could, in order to raise cash (Att. 11.25.3), perhapsalso intending to safeguardTerentia's money from the depredationfollowinga possible political and financial crash, as in the matter of the manumission
ofslaves in 58. His suggestion that Atticus go over the proposed sale withTerentia gives an indication of his continued trust in her judgement, and his
acknowledgementof her right to participate n decision-makingabout a matterof common concern.
Familymatterspredominated n the correspondencebetween the spousesatthis time. Tulliawas in poorhealth, andher divorcehad to be arranged.Moneymatters,when discussed,related to the arrangements or the returnof Tullia's
44Dixon (1984=1986: 103-107) thoroughlydiscusses the implicationsof both Cicero'simplicit
suspicionsand the financialarrangementsnvolved. While inferringthat it was Cicero'sagentwhohad gone missing, she considers t is highlyprobable hat he suspectedTerentia. See Shackleton
Bailey1965-70: vol 1, Introduction,46.
45UlpianDig. 50.16.195.5. Cf. Dixon 1992: 49 and nn. 50 and 51, Corbier in Rawson 1991:
52-53, Thomas 1992:99.46Dixon (1988: 230 and n. 24) quotes Crook as suggestingthat Terentiamayhavebeen slow in
paying up the next instalmentof Tullia'sdowry,which she had pledgedto do.
219
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
dowry.47A note to TerentiawrittenonJuly9, 47 (Fam. 14.10) showed no breath
of suspicion, and did not refer to the will. Cicero's assertionthat Pomponius
(Atticus)knewwhat he wanted and would discuss t with her elated o a divorce
notice from Tullia to be servedon Dolabella, as he made clearin a note pennedon the next day (uly 10, Fam. 14.13). No wordwas uttered aboutpeculation.
Cicero continuedto voice suspicionsof the steward,who was dearly difficult
to pin down. In lateJuly47 Cicero was awaitingPhilotimus'arrivalon the Ides
of August (Att. 11.19), dearly in connection with the will, but on August 6,even before the steward'sprojectedarrival,he complainedthat Philotimus was
attending to his own affairs,presumably nstead of those of his mistress(At.
11.24). This letter adumbrates ater conjugal suspicion in a complaint about
peculationof a small amount on the partof Terentia,but hinting at worse, themost directpieceof evidenceof deteriorating elations.Here Ciceroexpressed he
fearthat he would havenothingto give to Tullia, and admittedto mistrustinghis
wife. In the context of the role that Philotimus would haveplayedas steward n
the physicaldespatchingof money,one mayquerywhetherthe shortfallof moneyCicerocomplainedaboutto Atticus shouldnot perhapshavebeen laid athis door.
He seems to have been veryhigh-handedin his treatmentof the husbandof his
patrona. Could it be that Philotimus was a mischief-makerwho drovea wedgebetween the spousesfor his own nefariouspurposes?48
TERENTIA S WILL
At the last,when concernfor Tullia was rackingCicero'sconsciousnessmore
than concernfor the state, the matterof Terentia'swill cropped up frequently.Cicero's chief complaintwas that the will had not been finalized. This is often
interpretedas a sign that Cicero fearedthat theirmotherwould do badly by thechildren.It maymerely ndicate concernabout the uncertainpoliticalpositionofboth parents.Six months earlier, n the context of his daughter'smiseries,Cicero
had expressed he fear thatTerentiawas in as muchdangerof losing herpropertyashe washimself,and thatTullia wouldconsequently ose allmeansof support.49ShackletonBaileyComm.on Att. 11.16.5 (une 47), ascribesCicero'sconcern to
a desire to forestall he threat of confiscation hathung over him.
There neednot necessarily avebeenbad bloodbetween the marriage artners.Roman divorceamong the elite was frequentlypromptedby financialconsider-ations. Securingsome remnantsof their fortune could perhapshavebeen more
47Cicero had agonizedover whether to disbursethe third instalment,but did so and then later
hadproblemsgetting it back.Att. 12.5c (une 46) reportsTiro'ssuccess n gettinga promiseof returnfromDolabella. A detaileddiscussionof the politicalandpersonalramifications f this divorcewouldentail a separatepaper.
48Fau(1978: 10) suggeststhat the balanceof powerbetweenthe spouseswassuchthat Cicerohadto acceptthe detestablePhilotimus.
49Att.11.9.3,January47. The majorconcernof this letterwas the defection to the causeof Caesar
by Cicero'sbrotherQuintus.
PHOENIX20
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
easily achieved if the parentswere divorced, if Terentia were given back her
dowry, and if she then willed it to their children. This tentative explanation
cannot, however,be construed into fact from the text of Att. 11.16.50Yet it is
tempting to carry he speculationeven further.PerhapsCicerooriginallyhad no
intention of remarrying.The early history of the divorceshows little friction;none appears n the letters to Terentia. Petersson(1920: 518), one of Cicero's
more sensiblebiographers,has pointed out that the divorcewas lessharrowingthanthe quarrelMarcusCicero had with his brotherQuintus,who had redirected
his loyaltyto Caesar,even making scurrilousattackson his brother in letters to
common friends.51 To this heartacheMarcus Cicero was to returnagain and
again.
In sum, Cicero's etters to Atticus about the matterof Terentia'swill coincidedwith the time of Tullia'sdivorce, and also with the last notes to Terentia. All
but the last of these show no great changeof attitude.52Strangest s the factthat
Cicero never dealt directly n these notes to Terentia with the topic of her will,which was dearlyin his mind. Again there maybe reasonableexplanations:oss
of moreimportant etters,which had been filedseparately, r fear of interception.Dolabella's attitude to Tullia might have made it dangerousfor the spouses to
corresponddirectlyon a matter aimed at rescuingTerentia'smoney from their
common budget. Tullia'sdowrywould havebeen returned o her father,but at
least partof this hadthen to go to hermother,who hadprovided he funds in thefirstplace.
VALETUDO IN THE LAST LETTERS
ExceptforCicero'ssomewhat ormaluse of the pluralwhenreferringo himself
in some of the letters of the time,53 here are almost no signs of conjugalstrain
in the extant correspondencebetween Cicero and Terentia. Everyletter ended
with scrupulous,almost formulaicinjunctionsthat Terentia should take careof
her health.Even in the contextof normalepistolographicpractice, his is no mere
formality:Terentia sufferedfrom severerheumatism,and appearsoften to have
been laidup. The first of the letters to Atticus (Att. 1.5.8, May 68) reporteda bad
spell. Loving messagesin the early etters to Terentia referred o her rheumatic
condition,but so did the nextto last,written on the first of September47, in the
50Cf. the arrangementsCicero mooted to secureTerentia'sdotal slaves from confiscationduringhis exile,Fam. 14.4. See Dixon 1992: 184, n. 3.
51Atticus,as Quintus'brother-in-law,was in a position to help. Att. 11.9.2 indicates that these
friendsreportedback to Marcus,who apparentlyhad access to other letters,which he then openedand read. He was eagerto suppressthem, as reflecting badly on Quintus. He sent the packet to
Atticus,who was to forward t to his sister to sealandgive to herhusband.
52The first is Att. 11.16.5,June 47, followedin orderby (Att. 11) 25.3; 23.1, 3; 24.2; 21.1; 22.2,
July47 to 1 September47. See ShackletonBaileyad loc.11.16.53ShackletonBaileyComm.adloc.Fam 14.11. The we ouldhave been inclusive,referring o a
joint decisionby the spouses,or couldhave meant Ciceroand Atticus.
221
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
dying daysof the marriage,f not shortlybefore the formal divorce(Fam. 14.22).This note reported hat Cicerowas expectingtabellarios ostros, nd indicated hat
he would let her knowimmediately
what heplanned
to do. The note iscryptic:the expected ettersmayhavereferred o Tullia'sbusiness,ormayhave related o a
potentialreconciliationwith Caesar.That the allusion indicatesdivorcebetween
the partners s not a necessarynference.
The last letter to Terentia (Att. 14.20) followed a month later, written on
October 1, 47. It appearsabruptandperemptory,with no affectionateadditions.
In unconscious ring composition the word valetudinemoccurred n its usual
placetowardthe end of the note, but this time it was a commandthat she should
make sure that all comforts be prepared or the writer and his guests. There
were, significantly,no expressionsof joy at the possibility of seeing her, merecommands,as if to a flunky.As farascorrespondencewith Terentia s concerned,the restis silence.
POSSIBLEINFLUENCEOF QUINTUS CICERO'S
RELATIONSHIPWITH HIS BROTHER
Again we may ascribe this curtness to mere haste, but the note did differ
in format and tone quite considerablyrom even the briefest of earliermissives.
The question is, what had occurred n the interveningmonth to promptsuch adiscernible ncrease of coldness in conjugalrelations? We need to turn to the
correspondencewith Atticus once more, picking up the storya little earlier. On
just as he had suggested,but now, almost nine months since he firstheardof it,he was againbowed down with woe at Quintus'politicalandpersonaldefection
(Att. 11.21). Cicero'shappiness hroughouthis life had partlystemmedfrom his
relationshipwith his brother.Now Quintushad not only joined Caesar,but had
malignedhis brotherto friends
(firstreportedn Att.
11.9.3,3
January 7).We have seen Marcus Cicero in despairbefore: duringhis exile, and againwhen he was agonizing about which side to support in Caesar'sstandoff with
Pompey.Here we maybejustified n postulatingaperiodof increasingdepression,
broughton, not byhis wife'snon-cooperation forshe appeared erycooperative)nor by Tullia's miseries(for the divorceappearedat this time to be in hand) nor
by politics(for Caesarhadpardonedhis haplessopponent)but by the breakdownof relationswith a belovedbrother,which had occurredalmosta yearbefore,but
the memoryof which had returned o haunt Cicero. His heartyearnedover his
brother.This topic featuresagain in the next letter, a week later, which conveys an
impressionof Cicero'sdetermination o steel himself againstall feeling, either
negative or positive: [whetherQuintus is harmedby or cleared of blame for
his treatment of his men] mihi molestum on est Att. 11.22). Cicero took longto recover from his brother'streachery. Treggiari (1991a: 40) comments that,
222 PHOENIX
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
after the last letter to Terentia(October 1, 47), letters to Atticus reflect a greaterand greaterdeterioration n the relationshipbetween the spouses,but there is an
hiatus in the correspondencewith Atticus from 1 September47 (Att. 11.22, a
before the last note to Terentia)to April46 (Att. 12.5). About the actualdivorce,which presumably ccurred n this period,we have no direct nformation,andits
date cannot be ascertained.
In July46 came a letterscoffingabout the fact that the youngerQuintus and
the freedmanPhilotimus had both been enrolledamong the Luperci(Att. 12.5).Cicero had reason to feel wronged by both these parties.The tone of this letter
was ironic but cheerful: he patienthadrecovered,but bitter scarsremained.
MONEYMATTERSAGAIN
So the consularcouple split up, andmoney matterscontinuedto obtrude,not
so much as a cause,nor as a symptom,of the breakdown,but as its result.Cicero
marriedhis ward,therebygaining controlof her fortune:so Plutarch. The next
letters to Atticus which referred o Terentiawere all from 45, after the divorce
and deathof Tullia, andreflectedallthe agoniesof financialwranglingattendant
upon the obsequiesof a marriage, omplicatedby the fact thatby this time three
dowrieswere involved-those of Tullia and Publiliaas well as Terentia-whichhad to be disentangled rom Cicero'sown erratic inances.
We shall look at only a few of these last letters.54 n March 45 Cicero waxed
veryirascibleaboutTerentia'sreaction to his own will-making,and indignantly
compared his procedurewith hers (Att. 12.18a). Elizabeth Rawson (1979:
228) explainsthat Terentia was upset becausePublilius,the brother of the new
(ex-)wife, had been calledin asstand-in witness for Cicero'snewwill, in case the
numbershould fall short of the usual seven. The will was to providefor their
baby grandsonLentulus,the child of Tullia and Dolabella (who could not have
survivedhis motherlong).55About the same time Cicero was imploringAtticus
to undertake he business of wrestingfrom Dolabella the repaymentof Tullia's
dowry,andundertaking he returnof Terentia's o her, takinginto consideration
terms set by Balbus(Att. 12.12).56The allusion s a little obscure,andmayrefer
either to Terentia'shavingmade overthe debt to Balbus,as Winstedt explains,57or to Balbus'having givenCicero a promissorynote (so ShackletonBaileyadloc.).
54Chronologically he completelist, rangingfrom 13 March 45 to November44, is as follows:
Att. 12.22 and 23 followed within the same week, redolentwith grief, with
similarpleasthat Atticus shouldundertake he whole sadbusinessof disbursement
to Terentia. These letters were written in the first sad
days
afterTullia'sdeath,andin bettercircumstances he bereavedparentscouldhave drawncomfortfrom
each other.Instead,bitterwranglingcontinued,and the fatherdrew comfortfrom
collecting literaryand historicalprecedentsfor use in his consolatorymagnum
opus.We must assume hatdowrynegotiationsandpossiblewranglingconsequent
upon the second divorce started soon after.58Atticus was asked to arrangeother
moneymattersas well (Att.12.24, youngMarcus'allowance;12.25, purchaseof a
suitableproperty or Tullia'smonument).About a yearlater Cicerohad a windfall:in Att. 16.6, 25 July44, he referred
in one line to an inheritance hat hadhelpedto clearhis financialhorizon,andinthe next to paymentsof two sets of dowry-returns,59o Publiliusand to Terentia.
Atticus wasurgedto paythe latterbeforethe appointeddate. But this was dearlya minor consideration.Cicero'sliteraryefforts concerned him more. He was a
free man, psychicallyand psychologically ree. Yet in the verylast letter in the
entirecollection(Att. 16.16) the spectreof shortfallagainloomed:Tiro thoughtTerentia'sdowryhad to be repaidwith money coming in from Dolabella, but
there hadbeen a mistakeand nothingwas forthcoming.The tanglemuddledon,andwould end onlywith Cicero's ife.
A SOCIOLOGICALSURVEY
A chronological study of the correspondencehas shown a marriagethat
initiallyappearedhappy, evenby modernstandards,and that weathereda greatdeal of strain, not least the strain causedby the egocentrismof a husbandand
father, the fluctuations of whose political career nfluenced the fortunes of his
familyto a considerabledegree.Terentia'swifely support, oyalty,and active co-
operation n financialendeavourswas consistent overa long period. Apparently
uncharacteristicnon-cooperationin one case may have been the result of the
inefficiency or dishonesty of a clerk. Delays in the final preparationof her
will in the end appearas the sole disruptionof an otherwisesmoothlyrunning
relationship.Even in the light of the differencesof conceptionbetweenancientand modernmarriage, hen, as now, the working out of monetarydetails could
arouse hidden animosities. The most puzzling aspect is perhapsthe fact that
the letters to Terentia differin tone from those to Atticus. Even stranger s the
complete dearth of direct allusions to either the will or the divorce n the noteswritten
byCicero to his wife. A
possibleexplanations that an amicabledivorce
S8Terentia'sdowryhadamountedto 1.2 millionsesterces(Gardner1986: 101). Otherletters,notto be discussedhere,detail the embarrassmentausedto CicerobyanaccidentalmeetingwithPubliliaat her mother'shouse after the estrangement.
59We might be temptedto termthese the ancientequivalentof alimony,but all modem sources
arestrictaboutdifferentiatingbetween the two concepts.See Corbett1930: 127, 147-166, passim.
PHOENIX24
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
had beenarrangedhroughAtticus asthirdparty o saveTerentia's ortune roman
expectedpoliticalcrash,safeguardingt for the children,and that the subsequentactions of eitheror both partnershad souredthe arrangement.We haveseenthat
Plutarch'sexplanation s less flattering:the instabilityof his finances ed Cicero
to a last desperateresortto bolster his saggingfortune.
Much of recent feminist research n the Classics concentrateson the sociologyof Roman family life. Granting the marked dissimilarityin structureand
function between elite Roman marriage iberorumquorundamausaand modern
companionate marriageamong educated middle-classWesterners, one cannot
simply translateRoman ideals of maritalaffection into familiarmodern terms.
Yet observation f the statusandrightsof Romanwomen of the moneyedclasses,60
particularly f Terentia'smanagementof her own finances,61 nd considerationof Cicero's andTullia'saffairs62tempt one to postulatethat in happiertimes the
marriageof Cicero andTerentia was verymuch like the modern equal-partneror companionate ype of marriage.63
The questionthen arises:even if this were granted,would feelings have been
expressed n similarways, andwould maritaltensions have arisenfrom the same
psychologicalcauses?More: can the more extremeresourcesof modernsociologybe broughtto bearon the relationship?Lee and Haas (1992), while pointing out
the pitfalls inherent in attemptsto comparea single common aspect of two or
moredisparate ocieties, ustifytheirbasicpremiseas [thefactthat] socialsystemsand their propertiesare comparableat some level (1992: 119). Schvaneveldt tal. (1992) give a theoreticalrationale or the interpretationof documentssuch as
Cicero's etters in researchof the historyof familycoherence.There is, however,a problem in that we have Cicero'sreportsto Atticus and letters to Terentia,but none from her. Millar and Rogers (1988: 96, n. 1) emphasizethe crucialflawin analysesof maritaldynamics hat are basedonly on informationgarneredfrom one of the partners, aprocedure hat presupposes hat a part can knowthe whole. Christensen(1988: 38-52) stressesthat we need the
reportsof both
participantsn the interactionprocess n orderto understandmarital nteraction.In relyingsolely on Cicero'sportrayalof the relationshipwe are at best engagedin a flawedexercise. Yet the exercisecan have its uses, particularlyf we explorevarioussociologicalmodels. We can in the end do morethan set up a batteryofvariantinterpretations f the tensionswithin the Cicerofamily.
White (1990), while rapidly isting three areas o be viewedin researchon the
60Cf. Skinner 1983 on ClodiaMetelli, whom she largelyrehabilitates.61Of recentworks,only Delia (1991: 208, n. 8) queriesthe assumption hatTerentia was free to
63A centuryafter Cicero the Stoic MusoniusRufus(fr. 13A Lutz)wasarguing orpreciselysucha truemarriageof two minds. Cf. Dixon 1992: 32 and 1984=1986, also Bradley n Rawson1991:105-111.
225
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
familyprocess)deploresthe dearthof theoreticalstudies. He callsfor particularattention o familyprocesses uch asmate selectionandexpectationswithmarriage.He stressesthe need for cross-cultural nd historicalresearch or the elucidationof modern marriage ensions. A study of the Cicero family may be viewed asan exampleof a case study that answersthis call.64On Roman macrostructure
we arefairlydear (most sociologicalresearchon the ancientworld is directedat
portraying he societyas a whole), so, too, on life course and demographics,andareasof family process such as mate selection. But processeswithin ancient
marriagesare sometimesunclear,particularly s oursourcesare imited andoften
familyin Western thought.They leapfrom Plato throughAugustineto ThomasAquinas, pausing only at Plutarch's deas on marriage,and make no referenceto Roman thought. Burr (1992), criticizing this approach,makes the pointthat a historyof familytheorymust include more than sociologicalperspectives,and suggestsrecourse o psychological, amilyscience, and feminist perspectiveson family theory, and also anthropology,history, political theory, and human
development. According to Street (1994: 20) modernfamily conflict normallyfocuses on three areas:money, habits of fellow members,andrelationship ssuessuchas possessiveness.He indicates(15) that the individual'sconceptionof self
in interaction within arelationship,and alsoof the termsuponwhich interactionshould be focussed,influences symptombehaviour. The three sordid reasonsPlutarchoffers together point to three areas of conflict: quarrelsabout money,and about offspring, and neglect or loss of interest by one of the spouses, an
aspect today often coveredby the elusive term irreconcilable ifferences of
temperamentor outlook).65 The quarrel bout offspring we have reasonablycountered above. Can the other points stand? Are we justified in assuminga gradualtemperamentaldisillusionmentbetween the partnersor did Terentia
deliberatelyengineerthe divorcewhen her husband ost his
politicalpower,as
Fausuggests?66Orwas money,afterall, the basicproblem?Steinmetz, Clavan, and Stein (1990: 32-33) drawparallelsbetween Roman
marriageafter200 B.C.and the modernworld, specificallywith respectto familydisintegration,but also in the importanceof social class and the independentownership of propertyby women of the propertiedclass. They show (1990:480-495) that causes of modern divorce are often related to age at marriage,socialstatus,andfinances.In Romansociety,wheredivorceoften led to no morethan a realignmentof familyalliances,we have a roughequivalentof the modern
64Dixon (1992:xiii)arguesogentlyortheusefulnessormodemsociology f case tudiesromtheancientworld.
65Theseie in thethreedomainsdentifiedbyWhite(1990)asmacrostructureeconomictress),lifecourse(parenthood),ndfamily rocessmaritalnteraction).
66SeeIntroduction,bove.Fau 1978:56)unconvincinglymplieshatTerentiasought o regainloststatus ythisdivorce.
226 PHOENIX
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
no-faultdivorce. n modernsociety, no-fault usuallyadvantages he husband
financially.In the Roman system, the opposite may have obtained,particularlyin sine manu
marriage Dixon1992:
51).I have
suggestedabove that such an
advantagemayhave been envisagedwhen the divorcewas firstmooted, and that
acrimonyevolved ater.
Circumspection s needed in anypsychological nterpretation.Modern pop
psychologymight reinterpretPlutarch o picturean old man, temporally nsane,who thought to regain a lost youth by divorceand remarriage o a girl young
enoughto be his granddaughter.Worse, it could see the divorceas symptomaticof a dislocationof all feelings of decencyin Cicero, brought on by the perilous
politicsof the time. The attitudeof Atticus to Cicero shoulddirectus awayfrom
such extremes.In the context of modernmarriagecounselling,Street(1994: 30)advises a marriagecounsellorto engage in non-judgementalactive listening,and to exhibitempathyandacceptance,but not reciprocal ttachment. Atticus,as the major recipient,over many years,of Cicero's missives on any and every
subjectand the confidant of his extremereactions to everycrisis,was just such
a detached listener. What was Atticus observing in times of crisis? I have
elsewhereattempted o show that Cicero'sattitudeto his exilechangeddrastically
by hindsight(Claassen1992). He neveracknowledged hat he was in any wayto
blame. Miller et al. (1986) show that locusof control, hat is, the protagonist's
perceptionof the degreeto which he or she hascontrolovera relationship,playsan importantrole in coping with stress in the maritaldomain, and, conversely,that marriageplaysa vital role aspotentialmoderatorof extraneous tress.This is
corroboratedby Russell and Wells (1994), with the additionthat the tendencyto
accept responsibility or one's own behaviourmakesfor a bettermarriage.Theystatethatpre-existingneuroticism n eitherpartnerand lack of impulsecontrol n
the husbandaremajorcontributorso dysfunctionality, vendecadesafter t was
first manifested. One would hesitate to ascribethe failure of Cicero'smarriageeleven
yearslater to his neurotic reactions to exile in
58,but his continued
neuroticism,manifestedat everycrisis, may have been a contributingfactor.67
Cicero'svirtualdeificationof Tullia in 45, an extreme reaction to bereavement,has elicitedcomment.68
Street (1994: 8) emphasizesthat a chronologicalapproach o the uncoveringof stressfactors s required.Such an approachhas shown, above,that the Cicero
familyweatheredmany storms over the years. The politicalstressesof the years
immediatelyprecedingthe divorcewere intrinsicallyno different from previoustensions,but within the familynew stresseshad arisen.Today, too, familystress,
stemming from addition to or diminishing of family structure births, deaths)and loss of familymoralethroughinternal or externalnegativefactors(divorce,
67See Claassen 1992 on Cicero's changing attitudes to his exile and his tendency to self-
aggrandizement.6 See Boyancd1944.
227
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
demoralizationafter a rapid change of family status (up or down), deprivation
resultingfrom material oss, and organizational hange, either intrafamilial,the loss or addition of a familymember, or extrafamilial, n times of war and
political persecution. These are all factors that served after 49 to make the
Cicerofamily dysfunctional. xtrafamiliallyCicerowas involvedin oppositionto Caesar,intrafamiliallyhere was the defection of the Quinti, fatherand son.
Politics had intrudedto spoil a long-standing, happyrelationshipbetween twobrothers. Cicero's failed politics furtherdemoralizedhim, for he had lost all
his status in Rome while he skulked miserablyat Brindisi. Terentia was the
bettermanager,but was slow in disbursing.He andTerentiahadundergoneand
were again undergoingmaterialdeprivation, nteralia as a result of Dolabella's
squanderingof Tullia's dowry, payment of which kept falling due. Tullia's
health was poor. The need to conciliateher politically powerfulhusbandwhile
disentanglingtheir daughterfrom an unhappymarriagemade for complication.Tulliafirstreturned o the familyand then died, causing wo setsof organizational
change, two more being causedby the birth and subsequentdeath of her babyson.
Today, older couples'stress is frequentlyrelated to degreeof anxiety and
degreeof integrationof self (neurotictendencies of the kind discussedabove).Stress in a multigenerationalextended family can come from the impairmentof a child.69 Parents sometimes cope with such stress by emotionalcut-off,that is, non-cooperation, or non-communication. Christensen(1988: 38-52)
reportsa study which showed that a pattern of aggression-retaliations most
frequentn
happycouples,and does not occurat all in disturbed
coupleswhere a
demand-withdrawalpattern s most discernible.Was this perhaps he overridingfactor? Cicero had alwaysacknowledgedTerentia'spower to help. At the last,he felt that the help-meet was being obstructive,but he never told her so. He
simply arranged divorce.Could emotionalcut-off and a patternof withdrawal
in eitheror both partnersbe the reasonwhy there was no direct communication
between the coupleabouteither the divorceorTerentia'swill?
We should consider he degreeto which these factorsmayalso have influenced
Terentia. She had had yearsof experience n toleratingher husband'svagaries,
but at the last,perhaps, he intrafamilial risesprovedtoo much for her patience.Street(1994: 22) postulatesan interactiveife within marriage hat is meaningfree, hat is, neutralorwithout stress,but with the potentialto take on positive
meaning, recharging he partners n times of stress,helping them to copewith
69See Long andMancini(1990) on Bowen's family ystemsnetwork s a series of triangles.
228 PHOENIX
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
the worse,he exercisedcontrolagainand divorcedPublilia(Cf. Att. 13.34).71He
was free. The second divorcegavehim psychicfreedomeven if he remained n
financialbondage.The modernreadermaychoose to acceptany,all,ornone of the above heories.
Whether, on the evidence,the resourcesof a modernmarriagecounsellorcould
have saved the partnersa final standoff, no-one can say. Atticus, the non-
judgementalauditor, did all that was requiredof him, by one of the partners,no
more.In the endwe arestill left with the fact of adivorce,ahandfulof letters,and
a palpably nadequatedepositionby a biographerwho wrote well over a centuryafterthe divorcetook place.72
DEPARTMENTFCLASSICS
UNIVERSITYFSTELLENBOSCH
PRIVATE AGX01
7602 MATIELANDSTELLENBOSCH)
SOUTHAFRICA
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams,B. N. and S. K. Steinmetz. 992. Family heoryandMethods n theClassics,in Bossetal. 1993:71-94.
Balsdon,.P. V. D. 1962.RomanWomen.ondon.
Boss,P. G., W. J. Doherty,R. LaRossa,W. R. Schumm, nd S. K. Steinmetz.1993.SourcebookofFamilyTheoriesndMethods:AContextualApproach.ew York.
Boyance,P. 1944. L'Apoth6ose e Tullia, REA46: 179-184.
Bradley,K. R. 1991. Remarriagend heStructuref theUpper-Class omanFamily,inB. Rawsoned.)1991:79-98.
Brubaker,T. H. ed. 1990. FamilyRelationshipsn LaterLife.NewburyPark.
Burr,W. R. 1993: ExpandingheHistory fFamilyTheory ndMethods, nBossetal.1993:95-98.
Carcopino,J.1951. Cicero:TheSecretsofHis Correspondencetr. E. O. Lorimer).London.Carp, . 1981. TwoMatrons f theLateRepublic.Women'studies:189-200. London.
Christensen, . 1988. Dysfunctionalnteraction atternsn Couples, n Nollerand
Corbett,P. E. 1930. TheRomanLaw ofMarriage.Oxford.
Corbier,M. 1991. Divorce ndAdoptionas FamilialStrategies, n B. Rawsoned.)1991:47-78.
71Cicero'sdivorceof the young Publiliamayequallybe construedas an exampleof takingcontrol
oversomepartof his life, ashe could not control his daughter'sdeath.72Earlierdraftsof this paperwereread at anAncient Historyworkshopat the Universityof Cape
Town, September1993, andat a graduate eminarat the Universityof Pennsylvanian Philadelphia,October 1993. Thanksto the respectiveClassicsDepartments ortheirhospitality,and to participantsin each case for helpful discussion. Comments and detailed criticismby three anonymousreaderscontributedlargelyto the coherenceof my final revision of the paper. Thanks to the Division of
ResearchDevelopment,Universityof Stellenbosch, or financialaid.
230 PHOENIX
8/12/2019 CLAASEN, Documents of a Crumbling Marriage- The Case of Cicero and Terentia
