Did Mark Antony Contemplate an Alliance with His Political Enemies in July 44 B. C. E.?
T HIS PAPER SEEKS TO DISPEL the prevailing view that Mark Antony signaled a willingness to draw closer to his political enemies in the Senate in late July 44 B.C.E. Cicero informs us that rumors of a possible reconciliation between Antony and the "Liberators" Brutus and Cassius were brought to him on 7 August when he was waiting not far from Rhegium (on the "toe" of Italy) to continue his voyage to Greece (Att. 16.7.1; Phil. 1.7-8). The story has also made its way into Plutarch (Cic. 43.4). Scholars lay particular stress on Cicero's remark that he first began to think of returning to Rome after he read a transcript of a speech (contio) by Antony that was brought to him by some townsmen of Rhegium. Unfortunately Cicero tells us nothing specific about the contents of that speech, but modern accounts characterize it as having an "unexpectedly moderate tone,'" one that was "friendly and favourable to the Liberators."2 This interpretation rests on the assumption that in his speech Antony extended an olive branch to Brutus and Cassius. According to the standard reconstruction of events in late July, Antony was forced to adopt a radical shift in policy in the direction of drawing closer to the Senate. He did so, it is argued, out of a need to form a new political alliance as a counterweight to the threat posed by the surging popularity of Julius Caesar's chief heir Octavian, the future emperor Augustus. The precipitating factor that supposedly influenced Antony to change political course is said to be the success of Octavian's games in honor of Caesar and Venus Genetrix (20-c. 28 July),3 during which the appearance of a daylight comet (the sidus Iulium) was interpreted as a sign of Caesar's apotheosis.4
Epistulae ad familiares
Abbreviations Epistulae ad familiares 173-435 Commentary Addenda to the commentary Concordances Indices.
The Colours and Dresses of Racism in America
The monograph argues that American racism has two colours (white and black), not one; and that each racism dresses itself not in one clothing, but in four: (1) “Minimal” negative, when one race considers another race inferior to itself in degree, but not in nature; (2) “Maximal” negative, when one race regards another as inherently inferior; (3) “Minimal” positive, when one race elevates another race to a superior status in degree, but not in nature; and (4) “Maximal” positive, when one race believes that the other race is genetically superior. The monograph maintains that the needs of capitalism created black slavery; that black slavery produced white racism as a justification for black slavery; and that black racism is a backlash of white racism. The monograph concludes that the abolition of black slavery and the civil rights movement destroyed the social and political ground for white and black racism, while the modern development of capitalism is demolishing their economic and intellectual ground.