Corruption scandals periodically plague our democracies. The same was true in ancient Rome, where the power of money was often used to access political power. The candidates for public office knew it very well: if they wanted to convince voters, there was nothing better than bribing them with free food or shows. The problem with this way of proceeding was that it required enormous investments.
Some were squanderers, even if they had to turn to moneylenders. There were always those who took all those expenses as if it were a risky sport. Julius Caesar, according to his biographer Josiah Osgood in Caesar vs. Cato (Criticism), believed that going into huge debt was “little less than a sign of virility: it demonstrated confidence that one was intelligent and strong enough to repay what was lent.” .
Two things could happen on election day. In case of defeat, the risk of ruin loomed. Victory, on the contrary, meant that the time had come to recover the investment. This was achieved by squeezing the provinces with taxes or launching some war, useless from the point of view of public interest, only out of the desire for loot. Everyone knew that a victorious contest could be a very profitable business.
Caesar, after his conquest of Gaul, found himself so rich that he stopped being a debtor. Now it was he who lent to others. Like Cicero, a legendary orator who lived beyond his means due to his penchant for luxurious residences. In exchange, he would help him as a lawyer in some legal cases that affected his allies.
In this way, the generals achieved more and more power while public institutions sank into increasingly visible deterioration. If a leader opposed such a state of affairs, like Cato the Younger (95-46 BC), he risked losing his popularity. Voters would immediately protest if the perks to which they had become accustomed were taken away.
Corruption could also manifest itself in the management of the public treasury. The scribes in his charge possessed immense power. By manipulating the documents, a senator's debts, for example, were magically canceled. It is not surprising that powerful men requested all kinds of favors from them. In exchange, they were allowed to do the same with their own friends.
As today, politicians accused their rivals of corruption, regardless of whether they were guilty or not, to gain advantages. Caesar, to take revenge on Catullus, who had involved him in the Catiline Conspiracy, falsely accused him of embezzling the funds intended for the restoration of the temple of Jupiter. Thus, for a moment, he could appear before public opinion as an incorruptible hero and compete, in this field, with Cato, an antagonist who had become the heel of his sandal.
The Republic, like later the Empire, was by no means immune to the virus of corruption. The apostle Paul of Tarsus expressed that “the origin of all evil is greed.” In Latin, this phrase is precisely equivalent to “Rome”, as we can see if we combine the initials of the words in an acronym: “Radix Omnium Malorum Avaritia”. It may be that great virtues are often accompanied by equally striking defects.
