CATILINE (LUCIUS SERGIUS CATILINA) (C. I08-62 B.C.), a member of an ancient but impoverished patrician family of Rome. He was a supporter of Sulla, and during the proscription he was conspicuous for his greed and cruelty. He was guilty of at least one murder. In 77 he was a quaestor, in 68 praetor and in 67-66 governor of Africa. His impeachment for extor tion having disqualified him as a candidate for the consul ship, he formed a conspiracy, behind which, in all probability, were Crassus and Caesar. The new consuls were to be murdered on Jan. I, but the plot—the execution of which was deferred till Feb. 5—failed. Soon after, Catiline was acquitted through bribery in the trial for extortion. His scheme was now widened. The city was to be fired, and those who opposed the revolution were to be slain ; all debts were to be cancelled ; and there was to be a proscription of all the wealthy citizens. Among the conspirators were many men of rank and influence. Arms and money were collected, soldiers were enlisted, and the assistance of the slaves was sought. Catiline intended to secure the consulship for 63 with C. Antonius as colleague, but Cicero secured first place, and Catiline was defeated. C. Antonius, in whom Catiline hoped to find a supporter, was won over by his colleague Cicero. Before the next comitia consularia assembled, the orator had given so impressive a warning of impending danger that Catiline was once more rejected (63), and the consuls were invested with absolute authority. Catiline now resolved upon open war; preparations were set on foot throughout Italy, especially in Etruria, where re volt was raised by C. Manlius (or Mallius), one of Sulla's veterans. A plan to murder Cicero in his own house on the morning of Nov. 7 was frustrated. On the next day Cicero attacked Catiline so vigorously in the senate (in his first Catilinarian oration) that he fled to his army in Etruria. Next day Cicero awoke the terror of the people by a second oration delivered in the forum, in conse quence of which Catiline and Manlius were declared public ene mies, and the consul Antonius was despatched with an army against them. Meanwhile the conspirators in the city tried to induce some Gallic envoys who happened to be in Rome to join them. The plot was betrayed to Cicero, at whose instigation documentary evi dence was obtained, implicating Lentulus and others. They were arrested, proved guilty, and on Dec. 5 put to death in the under ground dungeon on the slope of the Capitol. This act was after wards attacked as a violation of the constitution, on the ground that the senate had no power of life and death over a Roman citizen. In the beginning of 62 Catiline saw his legions shut in between those of Metellus Celer and C. Antonius. Near Pistoria he was completely defeated by Antonius, and himself fell in the battle. It must not be forgotten that our authorities for this con spiracy were all members of the aristocratic party. Some of the incidents given as facts by Dio Cassius are absurdities; and Cicero paid more regard to the effect than to the truthfulness of an accusation. We find him at one time seeking a political union with Catiline; at another, when his alliance had been rejected and an election was at hand, declaiming against him as a murderer and profligate. Lastly, though Sallust's vivid narrative is consistent throughout, it is obvious that he cherished very bitter feelings against the democratic party. Nevertheless, we cannot regard Catiline as an honest enemy of the oligarchy, or as a disinterested champion of the provincials. It is held by some historians that there was at the time on the part of many of the Roman nobles a determination to raise themselves to power, despite the opposi tion of the senate; others maintain that Catiline's object was simply the cancelling of his huge debts.
See E. S. Beesley, Catiline, Clodius and Tiberius (1878) in defence of Catiline; E. von Stern, Catilina and die Parteikampfe in Rom 66-63 (1883), with bibliography in preface; C. Thiaucourt, Etude sur la conjuration de Catiline (1887), a critical examination of Sallust's account and of his object in writing it; J. E. Blondel, Histoire eco nomique de in conjuration de Catiline (1893) , written from the point of view of a political economist; Gaston Boissier, La Conjuration de Catiline 0905), and Cicero and his Friends (Eng. trans.) ; E. G. Hardy, "The Catilinarian Conspiracy—a re-study of the Evidence" (in Journal of Roman Studies, 1917) ; a good account in W. H. Heitland, The Roman Republic (1923) ; T. Rice Holmes, The Roman Republic ch. IV., and part II. pp. 446-473 (1923) ; Tyrrell and Purser's ed. of Cicero's Letters (index vol. s.v. "Sergius Catilina") . See also art. ROME: History, The Republic.