The Cicero-Appius reconciliation and Pompey’s pivotal role as mediator

During Cicero’s political career, particularly after his exile in 58 and subsequent return in 57, he faced complex political dilemmas that influenced his approach to reconciliation.^[1] The period following his return was marked by significant shifts in political alliances, particularly with Pompey and the other two members of the triumvirate. By April 56, the political landscape had changed dramatically, and Cicero found himself under pressure to mend relationships with several individuals who had played detrimental roles in his banishment.^[2] This situation was exemplified by Pompey’s own reconciliation with Clodius,^[3] which necessitated that Cicero make concessions to restore his political standing. Among those he had to address were Gabinius, whose actions during his consulship in 58 Cicero had vehemently opposed, and Crassus and Appius Claudius, both of whom were associated with adversaries from Cicero’s past conflicts. In navigating these reconciliations, Cicero had to carefully manage his public actions – such as defending Gabinius in court and seeking rapprochement with Crassus and Appius Claudius – to align with Pompey’s expectations and secure his own position within the political sphere.

Because of the public dimensions of his disagreements with these men, Cicero had every reason to be fearful of the scrutiny that he would face from people who would accuse him of vacillation.^[4] Publius Clodius Pulcher was not merely Appius’ brother, but also Cicero’s bitter enemy, who successfully orchestrated Cicero’s exile (Att. 3.1, 3.4), inflicting permanent damage on the trajectory of Cicero’s political career.^[5] Appius repeatedly supported his brother in efforts to undermine Cicero politically, socially, and even financially upon his return (Pis. 35). Cicero’s decision to defend Milo in 52 for the murder of Clodius exacerbated the already strained relationship between Cicero and Appius, making the prospect of a public reconciliation between the two men highly improbable.

Their reconciliation is addressed repeatedly in their correspondence, though only thirteen of Cicero’s letters to Appius are extant.^[6] Likely in an attempt to justify his decision to restore his relationship with Appius despite their history, in a letter from June 51 Cicero lists a series of reasons that brought him closer to Appius (Fam. 3.4.2). First, he states that his esteem for Appius has changed considerably ever since he noticed Appius’ regard for him. The more Appius displayed his respect for him, the stronger their association became. In other words, Cicero denies that their decision to reconcile was forced or that it was made instantaneously, but rather something that happened organically because of Appius’ attitude towards him. Notably, he does not attempt to distort reality completely, as he brings up the persons who played a vital role in their reconciliation, i. e. Pompey and Brutus.^[7] Since he cannot admit that Pompey put considerable pressure on him^[8] to reconcile with Appius, a simple reference to him and Brutus can at least give some verisimilitude to his story of events, as does his remark about appreciating Appius’ approval of his election as augur.

At first sight, the medium of letters would not appear to be the most effective means to display publicly their reconciliation. Instead, their restored relations could easily be advertised in a public speech which would reach a much wider audience. Nonetheless, Cicero chooses to make a reference to it both in his defence of Scaurus in 54^[9] and in his pseudo-private letters to Appius.^[10] One explanation for the use of the latter is the particularly public nature of the communication between Roman aristocrats. Copies of letters were made both by the sender and the receiver and could easily be distributed to others, as Cicero tended to do with the letters that he received by men such as Antony or Caesar and forwarded to his close friend and confidant,^[11] Atticus.^[12] However, there is another possibility that needs to be explored. Unlike his reconciliation with Crassus which had taken place before the composition of his letter to Crassus (Fam. 5.8) – since the letter simply confirmed their renewed relations – his letters to Appius were an active part of their reconciliation. The two men did not simply decide to put their differences aside and reconcile publicly following Pompey’s admonition, but their reconciliation was possible to a great extent because of the way in which each one addressed the other’s concerns and complaints.^[13]

The 13 extant letters that Cicero sends to Appius between the end of 53^[14] and August 50 address a series of problems that they faced with each other’s conduct and tried to resolve through their letter exchange. While, as mentioned above, their first reconciliation had already taken place in 54, two main incidents almost led to a complete dissolution of their publicly restored amicitia, namely Appius’ conduct after the end of his term as governor of Cilicia and his prosecution by Cicero’s son-in law, Dolabella. Unlike his reconciliation with men like Atticus (Att. 3.15.4–8) and Crassus (Fam. 5.8), which is addressed in a single letter, his correspondence with Appius provides insight into the reconciliation process over a long period in which several problems arise and are confronted in substantially different ways.

Unsurprisingly, Cicero’s language in most of his letters to Appius is distinctively polite.^[15] The orator seems at pains to maintain a cordial relationship with him chiefly in order to please Pompey^[16] and to a certain extent Brutus, as Appius’ daughter was married to Pompey’s son,^[17] and his other daughter to Brutus.^[18] His correspondence with Appius differs considerably from his conciliatory letter to Crassus, in which there is no direct reference to Pompey, as, despite the fact that Pompey acted as a mediator in both cases, his connection with Appius was undoubtedly stronger.^[19] He repeatedly refers to Pompey and Brutus in his letters to Appius and even quotes Pompey (Fam. 3.9.2). Though he speaks highly of both of them, his compliments focus on Pompey^[20] and strike a highly deferential subordinate pose.^[21] The fact that in his first reference to them he states that he holds them in high regard suggests that he expected them to receive copies of those letters or at the very least to be informed about their content from Appius or Appius’ men. In order to demonstrate to Pompey that he was a reliable ally, he had to make it abundantly clear to him that he was doing everything in his power to remain in Appius’ good graces. If Appius were to reject Cicero’s efforts, Cicero would still have shown Pompey that he had performed his duty to him. An act of deference to Appius would be perceived as sign of respect to Pompey.^[22] It follows that the role that Pompey and Brutus played in the reconciliation process was not limited to the initial agreement between Cicero and Appius to become allies in the public eye. On the contrary, the strong likelihood of them reading the letters between the new allies functioned as a constant reminder, especially to Cicero, to be at his best behaviour. As a result, when Cicero’s son-in-law, Dolabella, prosecuted Appius, Pompey, who was keeping close oversight of their association, foresaw their imminent quarrel and intervened. Cicero reveals that Pompey sent him a letter which made him feel obliged to work with Appius. He argues that even if he had harboured any resentment for him – which he denies, as he claims to consider him an intimate friend – he would abandon it, in order to honour Pompey’s wishes (Fam. 3.10.10). His remark seems to suggest that Pompey put considerable pressure on him to be on good terms with Appius, especially because of the debt that Cicero owed Pompey for being chiefly responsible for his return from exile.^[23]

One of the main strategies that Cicero uses in his letters to secure Appius’ cooperation is polite overstatement or flattery.^[24] His truly private correspondence with Atticus^[25] reveals that his remarks to Appius were most certainly disingenuous,^[26] though necessary between Roman aristocrats.^[27] In all 13 extant letters he praises Appius for his personal qualities^[28] and his achievements. Most of his positive remarks appear to centre around Appius’ existimatio and dignitas (Fam. 3.4.1).^[29] The reciprocity that Cicero and Appius display appears to expedite their efforts for reconciliation and to play a decisive role in the maintenance of their public amicitia.^[30] In at least some of the non-extant letters that Appius sent to Cicero, he apparently used equally affectionate language.^[31] According to Cicero, one letter that was delivered to him by Appius’ freedman, Phanias, was plenas et amoris et offici (Fam. 3.1.2).^[32] In the course of time from 54 to 50, Appius was able to show his good will towards Cicero in public, which Cicero claims to have noticed and appreciated.^[33] An excellent opportunity arose when Cicero was elected to the College of augurs, as Appius had in the previous years. Appius enthusiastically approved of his election (Fam. 3.4.2) and even made a grand gesture by dedicating to Cicero a volume on augury (Fam. 3.4.1), thereby publicly cementing their reconciliation. Additionally, in June 51, when they made plans to meet, Appius displayed collegiality by informing Cicero that he would not move until they met.^[34] Cicero was evidently pleased and expressed his gratitude to him (Fam. 3.4.2). In order to compensate for their fallout, Cicero knew that he had to exceed everyone’s expectations of him, including Appius’, hence his constant reminder of the kind of services that he has provided and will continue to provide for him, as well as their frequency and magnitude.^[35] Nonetheless, Appius was not always in complete agreement with Cicero in regards to the references to their exchange of services. Even though he claimed that he was pleased to read Cicero’s letter, he noted that he found it unnecessary to discuss matters long passed. Cicero replied politely by agreeing with him, but also by seizing the opportunity to twist Appius’ remark into something positive: Appius was indeed correct that the it is superfluous to discuss past exchange of services precisely because they have nothing to prove to anyone; their amicitia is not only genuine (vera) and strengthened (confirmata), but, most importantly, tried over the years, hence the apparent bond of trust that they have built with one another (Fam. 3.5.1). This level of diplomatic subtlety allows Cicero to maintain the carefully crafted narrative of their relationship as an intimate and long-lasting amicitia.^[36] Despite his insistence that their relationship was not a strictly political alliance, but a personal friendship,^[37] through his constant references to the exchange of services between them, it becomes apparent that, at its core, their amicitia was a mutually beneficial association.^[38] Its utilitarian nature is first hinted at by Cicero in his efforts to convince him that his assistance during the transfer of power would be in the best interest of both, since Cicero would repay him by offering similar support. His remark quod si tu quoque eandem de mea voluntate erga te spem habes, ea te profecto numquam fallet (Fam. 3.2.1) betrays an intention for quid pro quo.^[39]

In addition to expressing his friendly sentiments and affection towards Appius,^[40] Cicero speaks of malevoli homines, i. e. people who try to influence their opinion of each other.^[41] Such a vague reference can also be found in his efforts to reconcile with Crassus (Fam. 5.8.1–2) and with Pompey (Dom. 28). In both cases Cicero shifts the blame to unnamed persons in an attempt to justify his well-known fallout with these men. With his remarks, he implicitly denies that there were any inherent problems between them and suggests that their amicitia would not have been ruptured had he not listened to the words of certain devious men (Fam. 3.8.4, 6). In Appius’ case, though, he chooses a distinctively different approach. He emphatically notes that there were indeed several men who attempted to sway his opinion of Appius with their claims. Nonetheless, Cicero states that he refuses to believe their reports about Appius.^[42] He thus proves to be a trusting friend whose shared experiences with Appius have made him feel confident that the claims about his dear friend could have been nothing more than fabrications.^[43] While a comparison of Cicero’s earlier claims about Crassus and Pompey with his statements about Appius allows him to elevate his amicitia with the latter into a unique relationship for men who are actively involved in politics, it also lends itself for a second comparison between Appius’ and Cicero’s conduct. Cicero explicitly and repeatedly informs Appius about the disturbing reports that he is receiving concerning Appius’ remarks about Cicero. He wittily addresses these reports not only by claiming that he refuses to believe them, but also by adding that, even if they were indeed true, Appius would be doing him a favour (Fam. 3.6.5).^[44] Regardless of how Appius replies to the reported accusations, Cicero has absolved him of any wrongdoing. The orator succeeds in implicitly informing his predecessor that he finds his behaviour unacceptable, without offending him, since he gives Appius the opportunity to deny it and refrain from acting as if he were still the governor of Cilicia at least henceforth.^[45]

One element that features prominently throughout their correspondence and plays an integral role in their efforts for reconciliation is calculated tact.^[46] Bending of truth and niceties between Roman aristocrats were especially common in their letter exchange and naturally the letters of reconciliation are no exception. After deciding to end their quarrel publicly, in order to appease common allies or because of personal considerations, Roman politicians, such as Cicero and Appius, attempted to create an illusion around their association. Cicero’s letters to Appius indicate that he sets out to establish their relationship as a strong amicitia that is grounded in benevolentia (Fam. 3.1.1).^[47] The reader of the letters, whether it is Appius, Pompey, Brutus, one of Appius’ men, or a fellow politician, is given the impression that Cicero’s bond with Appius cannot easily be severed. The use of superlatives becomes imperative and an absolute expectation in their references to their amicitia.^[48] In fact, in May 51 Cicero urges Appius to show everyone through his actions that he considers no one a closer friend than Cicero (Fam. 3.3.1). Two months later, in another letter to Appius, he claims that they are bound by a strong bond of amicitia, which Cicero desires first to be known by Appius and then to be believed by everyone else (Fam. 3.5.2). Appius knew all too well that such a personal friendship between them did not exist, but he is, nonetheless, invited to act in public as if he considers Cicero a dear friend. The fact that both of them attempt to keep up the façade for as long as they possibly can allows them not only to remain on good terms publicly, but, more importantly, to address certain issues that arise between them by avoiding clashing with one another.

When Cicero was about to succeed Appius as governor of Cilicia in 51, he desired to ensure a smooth transition of power by sending him a letter in which he attempted to oblige him to act in a proper manner. In his second extant letter to Appius, Cicero begins by admitting that he was not pleased with his appointment as governor of Cilicia and stresses that the decision was made against his will (Fam. 3.2.1). Considering Cicero’s constant efforts to remain in Rome, his fellow politicians and allies could safely assume that his remark was indeed genuine. At the same time, his opening statement enables him to remind Appius that he cannot truly assign any blame to him for taking up Appius’ position. If Cicero were allowed to make a decision for himself, he would have most certainly remained in Rome. This is an important point that he reiterates by stressing that the senatorial decree obliges him to begin his tenure as governor (Fam. 3.2.2). Since both men are displeased with this decision and thus find themselves in an awkward position, Cicero suggests that the best course of action is to help one another by making the transition less troublesome for each party. After promising Appius that he will be a friendly successor, he expresses his delight in the fact that he is taking over from a man qui mallet eam quam maxime mihi aptam explicatamque tradere (Fam. 3.2.1). With the way in which Cicero phrases his belief that Appius will be cooperative, he implicitly suggests that failure to do so would reflect badly on Appius in the public eye. A further step that Cicero takes, in order to secure Appius’ support, is an appeal to the close bond (summa coniunctione, Fam. 3.2.1) that they have forged.^[49] He makes a similar remark at the end of the letter, by stressing its brevity and arguing that it is in line with the expectations of their amicitia.

In his efforts to ensure a working relationship with Appius that would please their allies, he chose to assume the role of the inferior party in his communication with Appius.^[50] This conscious decision that he made first appears in his second extant letter when he asks for Appius’ cooperation as outgoing governor. After praising him for his kindness to Cicero himself as well as to others and pledging his support of him, instead of demanding his assistance or stating with certainty that Appius will provide it, he stresses that Appius himself needs to decide on his own (tui consili est, Fam. 3.2.2) how he is going to act and whether or not he will grant Cicero’s request. Cicero continues to use similar language in his letters to Appius, by constantly trying to accommodate Appius’ needs, even at his own expense. The letter that he sends to him in July 51 constitutes a prime example of the lengths that he was willing to go to for them to appear united in the public eye. It concerns their plans to meet, as customary between governors, for the transfer of power. Cicero shows a clear intention to Appius or any other reader of the letter that he is doing everything in his power to make their meeting as convenient as possible for Appius. He begins by noting that when he saw Appius’ freedman, Phanias, at Brundisium, he assured him that he would gladly travel to any part of the province that Appius would prefer. After Phanias informed Cicero that it would be more convenient for Appius to travel by boat and meet at Side, Cicero immediately concurred. He ended up listening to L. Clodius, who informed him that Appius was at Laodicea. He adds that he chose that route not only because it was shorter and more convenient for himself, but also because he was under the impression that it would be preferable for Appius. Nevertheless, Appius’ plans changed without anyone notifying Cicero (Fam. 3.5.3). Instead of showing any kind of annoyance or exasperation with the miscommunication that prevented them from finally meeting, Cicero displays notable understanding and suggests that Appius make a decision on how to proceed. He even reassures Appius that he will constantly keep him informed with detailed reports on where he is and what routes he is planning on taking, in order to facilitate Appius’ plans of meeting him (Fam. 3.5.3). The language that Cicero uses gives the impression of someone who works for Appius rather than his equal. When he praises Appius liberalitas, he attributes it to his nobilitas, and claims that he is more generous than Cicero (Fam. 3.8.8).^[51] He even seems to show some signs of fear to speak frankly and thus upset a superior when he notes that oneris tibi imponere nec audeo quidquam nec debeo (Fam. 3.5.4).^[52] In his efforts to avoid offending Appius, he underlines the importance for both of them to meet before Appius’ departure, but only quod commodo tuo fieri possit (Fam. 3.5.4). It follows that, if Appius decides that he does not wish to meet him,^[53] Cicero has already declared that he will not be offended. On the contrary, he refers to the possibility of Appius’ inability to see him as casus (Fam. 3.5.4), i. e., an “unexpected event” or a “misfortune”, thus further providing excuses for Appius’ possible unfriendly conduct and again absolving him from blame.

Cicero’s best efforts to persuade Appius notwithstanding, their correspondence indicates that Appius proved reluctant to comply with his requests. Consequently, Cicero was forced to change tactics. While he does not abandon politeness in his letters to Appius, he gradually changes his tone in the hope of stressing the severity of Appius’ actions, without coming into conflict with him, as one of his main concerns appears to have been to maintain their reconciliation in the public eye. He was well aware that, if he were to attack Appius, his conduct would be strongly disapproved of by Pompey, Brutus, and even Atticus.^[54] As a result, in his third extant letter, written about three months after Fam. 3.2, he attempts to make a second appeal to their amicitia, though with two notable differences. He politely^[55] begins by reminding him of his earlier request about his assistance with the transfer of power. The repetition of the request after the passing of such a long period of time clearly shows that Appius was unwilling to provide the assistance that Cicero had requested. While in his second extant letter to Appius he had shown deference to him by leaving the decision of how Appius would act entirely up to him, in this letter he makes an interesting addition. He claims that whatever Appius decides to do, it will have his approval, but also, in an attempt to oblige him, he expresses certainty that Appius will not fail to grant his request.^[56] More importantly, he implicitly reminds Appius that there is an obvious problem of optics that needs to be borne in mind, since Appius’ inappropriate conduct is at variance with their public relationship.^[57] Even though he does not name anyone specifically, the phrase ut omnes intellegant (Fam. 3.3.1) works as a strong reminder of the very public dimension of their association. A similar statement can be found in a letter from July 51, in which he stresses that, apart from Appius and Appius’ people, the rest of the world also needs to believe that such an intimate friendship exists between them.^[58] Many people are watching closely how Cicero and his predecessor will act, in order to confirm their suspicions over the sincerity of their association.^[59] Therefore, Appius needs to take certain measures to act in a way that shows solidarity with Cicero, rather than hints of possible dissention. In June 51 Cicero claims that on his part he has demonstrated repeatedly his zeal for Appius through the services that he has provided for him, but stresses the importance of this commitment to be well known publicly, hence the use of the verb declaro.^[60] Appius is thus invited to follow Cicero’s example through his actions and decisions as well.

As the months went by and Appius’ treatment of Cicero became increasingly insulting, Cicero must have realised that the overt politeness that he had been displaying in his letters was not as effective as he expected it to be. Hence, in July 51 he sends to Appius another effusive letter, but ends it by implicitly accusing Appius of lying to him. Appius claimed to have instructed Scaevola to work in his place as governor while he was away until Cicero took office. However, when Cicero met Scaevola at Ephesus, he stated that he had received no such instructions from Appius. Instead of making a direct accusation against Appius, he suggests that it was a matter of miscommunication and simply expresses his wish for Scaevola to have performed the task which he was assigned. The following three extant letters that he sends to Appius (Fam. 3.6, 3.7, 3.8) are of particular import, because of the frankness that he displays in them.^[61] A dramatic shift in tone can be observed from the very beginning of the letter that he sent to Appius in August 51.^[62] He explicitly accuses him of lack of reciprocity in his efforts to maintain their amicitia.^[63] Though he still addresses several issues politely, his dissatisfaction with Appius for the first time becomes apparent thanks to the public nature of letters between politicians. He explains how through his actions Appius gives the impression not of a close friend, like Cicero himself does, but of someone who is simply indifferent.^[64] He notes that he could use harsher words to describe him, but that he refrains from doing so.^[65] With such a remark, he issues a stark warning to Appius that if his conduct does not improve, it will lead to a conflict between them that neither of them would desire. At the same time, after experiencing Appius’ discourteous behaviour, the fact that he displays such restraint must be appreciated by their allies. Appius’ conduct is not simply demeaning to the new governor, but a matter with serious legal ramifications. Cicero’s references to the lex Cornelia (Fam. 3.6.3, 6), according to which the outgoing governor had thirty days to depart the province, underscore the severity of this ordeal. He raises two further, but equally important, issues: three cohorts are still missing from his forces and he has not even received a letter from Appius informing him about his whereabouts and when he plans to see Cicero. In order to rectify the situation, Appius is implicitly urged to voice no objection to D. Antonius who will be tasked with taking over the cohorts from Appius. He is also asked to set a date for their meeting based on the information that Cicero provides him about his itinerary, but also considers the possibility that Appius will find it unnecessary. However, if they do not, in fact, meet, everyone will know that all the blame should fall on Appius.^[66]

Similarly, when Appius reproaches Cicero for the claims that he made against him in the presence of others, Cicero adopts an even more disgruntled tone in his replies.^[67] He underscores the sharp contrast between his own dismissal of reports against Appius with Appius’ consideration of the validity of reports that paint Cicero in a negative light and argues that, as a friend, Appius should not have listened to sycophants, as his trust in his friend should have been enough.^[68] It is worth noting that because of the public nature of their correspondence, Cicero was aware that he would have to convince both Appius and the rest of the likely readers – including Pompey and Brutus who expected him to maintain a working relationship with Appius – that the reports were false. However, by reminding him that Cicero himself has repeatedly dismissed similar claims, he encourages him to follow his example and demonstrate trust in his friend’s word over reports made by third parties.^[69] Even if Appius refuses to accept Cicero’s proposal, Cicero has already presented himself as the magnanimous friend and Appius as an intransigent man. Pompey, who is constantly on Cicero’s mind can only be displeased with Appius’ conduct, based on Cicero’s letters.^[70] Cicero’s harsher approach and display of frankness^[71] combined with politeness seems to have aided their efforts to reconcile, as evident in the letter that he sent to him in February 50 (Fam. 3.9). More importantly, in April 50, Cicero claims in a letter to Atticus that he harbours no ill will towards Appius (Att. 6.2.10). By May 50, in a letter to Caelius Rufus, he expresses that he has even developed a genuine regard for Appius following their reconciliation, and that Appius’ conduct towards him suggests the feeling is mutual (Fam. 2.13.2).^[72]

Three out of the last four extant letters from their correspondence (Fam. 3.10, 11, 12) deal with Dolabella’s decision to prosecute Appius as well as Cicero’s continuous efforts to convince him that he was not in any way involved in that decision and that he did not approve of it or even his daughter’s union with such a man (Fam. 3.12.2–3). In the longest letter from their correspondence (Fam. 3.10)^[73] Cicero responds to a letter that he had received from Appius, in which Appius casts doubt on Cicero’s sentiments towards him. Cicero explicitly states that his intention in the letter is to exculpate himself and to remove any doubt from Appius’ mind that Dolabella’s actions reflect in any respect on how Cicero perceives his relationship with Appius (Fam. 3.10.6–7).^[74] Apart from criticizing Dolabella and expressing his disapproval of him (Fam. 3.10.5), thereby distancing himself from his son-in-law, his letter encompasses all the main methods of reconciliation that he had used in his previous letters to Appius to maintain their working relationship. More specifically, his letter displays the same strategic narrative that the rest of the correspondence with Appius does, which ostensibly gives the impression that it was written aimed at anyone but Appius himself who was well aware that Cicero’s claims were mere exaggerations or even constituted a complete distortion of the truth. A significant part of his argumentation revolves around Pompey, to whom both are closely attached as allies. After praising Pompey repeatedly and stressing the kind of amicitia that he has developed with him over the years, he even claims that he had Pompey’s blessing in Milo’s defence.^[75] He, nonetheless, appeals to Appius’ ratio by raising a valid question: would Cicero truly do anything that would jeopardize his relationship with such an important friend and ally (Fam. 3.10.10)?

The remainder of his strategy to achieve reconciliation is consistent with his previous efforts. It includes further strategic communication, highlighting their mutual enjoyment in reading each other’s letters,^[76] the pleasure Cicero derives from Appius’ happiness,^[77] and the important similarities in their character and political views that brought them together (Fam. 3.10.9). Additionally, Cicero employs courteous exaggeration (Fam. 3.10.9)^[78] and offers praise of Appius.^[79] Additionally, he blames again persons whom he does not name for their misunderstanding (Fam. 3.10.6–7). His invitation to Appius to follow his example and deny the existence of a real disagreement between them reaches its climax when he tells Appius that if he reads a letter in which he finds Cicero’s language in any way insulting, he should simply assume that it is spurious (Fam. 3.11.5). His reference to their past exchange of services (Fam. 3.10.6) and his pledges for support (Fam. 3.10.1, 3.11.3, 5) are also a crucial part in Cicero’s efforts to convince Appius to disarm his resentment, by reminding him of the utilitarian nature of their association. Seemingly in an attempt to complete their reconciliation and to make it official publicly once again, Cicero had asked Appius to complete his work on augury and send him a copy of it; seeing that Appius was preoccupied, he suggests that he writes it at a later time (Fam. 3.11.4).^[80] Cicero’s attempts to restore their relations were successful, as revealed in the last letter from their extant correspondence.^[81] He no longer has to explain himself to Appius, though he chooses to stress the dual nature of their amicitia, as a strong bond both publicly and privately (Fam. 3.13.2).

As the discussion has demonstrated, Cicero’s reconciliation with Appius and the maintenance of an amicable relationship with him, both in public and in private, was a long and challenging process. Pompey played an integral role in their renewed association from the outset. He first compelled Cicero to reconcile with Appius, then closely monitored their public interactions, likely even by reviewing their letter exchanges, and later encouraged Cicero to repair the damage that Dolabella’s prosecution had caused to their amicitia. Given Cicero’s indebtedness to Pompey for his return to Rome in 57, and his desire to avoid jeopardizing his amicitia with both Pompey and Brutus, he chose to establish an amicitia with Appius that was grounded in strategic diplomacy. Appius could indubitably discern Cicero’s tendency to bend the truth by depicting their relationship as both a strong alliance and an intimate friendship. Nevertheless, he preferred to follow his example by reciprocating the affection that Cicero was showing in their letters, though to a lesser extent than Cicero. Because of his family name and his connections, Appius acted as the superior friend in his amicitia with Cicero. He chastised Cicero for the reports that he was receiving and expressed his dissatisfaction with him. In his letters to Appius, Cicero defends himself by expressing his thoughts with more frankness than one usually finds in Cicero’s correspondence. He compares his refusal to believe any negative reports about Appius with Appius’ tendency to trust the words of men who desired to create a rift between them. By openly addressing the issues that they had with each other’s conduct, they were able to improve their relationship and achieve a more meaningful reconciliation. At the same time, being perfectly aware of the importance of appearances, Cicero used polite overstatement in his constant praise of Appius. He made several references to their services rendered and pledges for his political support of Appius. The volume on augury that Appius dedicated to Cicero was further testament of their restored relationship and of their commitment to each other. The public exchange of favours and Appius’ gift allowed them to show a united front in the eyes of their allies, but also to enjoy each other’s support, as their amicitia was indeed mutually beneficial. Ultimately, Cicero’s letters to Appius reveal that their letter exchange aided their efforts for reconciliation significantly. It enabled Cicero to display deference to Appius and Pompey and to deny the reports that Appius was receiving. As a result, he was able to resolve his disputes with Appius without any apparent underlying strong feelings of resentment from either side.