Letter XXXVII: ad familiares 15.15
Rome, the end of April or the early part of May, 50 B.C.
This is Cato's reply to Ep. XXXIV. It is interesting as the only thing we have from his pen. The blunt manner, the brevity of the letter, and the rigidity of its style not only seem characteristic of the writer, but make the letter an excellent foil to the epistle of Cicero, which is remarkably guarded in referring to the matter at issue, is circumstantial in its statements, and varied in its style. The supplicatio was decreed by the senate, but Cato voted against it. For Cicero's opinion of Cato's course, cf. Att. 7.2. 7 qui (i.e. Cato) quidem in me turpiter fuit malevolus: dedit integritatis iustitiae clementiae fidei mihi testimonium, quod non quaerebam; quod postulabam, id negavit.
quod [gap in text] me [gap in text] hortatur: the use of two accusatives is very common in archaic Latin after verbs of seeking, warning, etc., especially when one of the accusatives is a neuter pronoun (cf. e.g. Ter. And. 918; Heaut. 353); and this construction, which is perhaps a colloquial survival in the prose of the Ciceronian period (cf. Reisig-Schmalz, Lat. Syn. note 562), is frequent in the Letters; cf. multa deos venerati sunt, Fam. 6.7.2; illud te peto, Ep. LII. 2.
virtutem [gap in text] administrari : this would be a very harsh expression for Cicero, but is perhaps not to be changed in a letter fromfato.
togati: in agreement with the genitive implied in tuam.
ut innocentia, etc.: in his summary of Cicero's achievements, Cato bluntly disregards his claim that he has barred the progress of the Parthians and driven them back (cf. Ep. XXXIV. 7), and in fact practically ignores his military exploits in general. innocentia refers to abstinence from corrupt use of power for personal gain.
Ariobarzanis: cf. Ep. XXXIV. 6.
decreto : cf. Fam. 8. II. 2 tantum Catoni (Hirrus) adsensus est, qui (i.e. Cato) de te locutus honorfice non decrerat supplicationes.