Do you not understand, in the first place, what sort of men,
 what sort of citizens they were whom, now that they are dead, you are accusing of the greatest
 wickedness? Are you not aware, how many of those who are still alive, you, by the same
 accusation, are bringing into peril of their lives? For if Caius Rabirius committed a capital
 crime in having borne arms against Lucius Saturninus, yet the age which he was then of might
 furnish him with some excuse by which to secure himself from danger. But how are we to defend
 Quintus Catulus, the father of this Catulus, a man in whom the very highest wisdom, eminent
 virtue, and singular humanity were combined? and Marcus Scaurus, a man of great gravity, wisdom,
 and prudence? or the two Mucii, or Lucius Crassus, or Marcus Antonius, who was at that time
 outside the city with a guard? all men than whom there was no one of greater wisdom or ability
 in the whole city; or how are we to defend the other men of equal dignity, the guardians and
 counselors of the republic, who behaved in the same way, now that they are dead? What are we to say about those most honourable men and most excellent
 citizens, the Roman knights, who then combined with the senate in defence of the safety of the
 republic? What are we to say of the aerarian tribunes, “The tribuni aerarii , who constituted an order in the latter days of the
 republic, and who were, in fact, the representatives of the most respectable plebeians, were
 originally heads of tribes, who acted as; general inspectors and collectors of the aes militare for the payment of the troops.” “The charge of the
 treasury was originally entrusted to the quaestors and their assistants, the tribuni aerarii .” “Niebuhr supposes that the tribuni aerani , who occur down to the end of the republic, were only the successors
 of the tribunes of the tribes.” Vide Smith, Dict. Ant. pp. 19,
 20, 987, vv. Aerarii , Aerarium , Tribunus . and of the men of all
 the other orders in the state, who then took up arms in defence of the common liberties of all?
 
 But why do I speak of all those men who obeyed the command of the consuls? What is to become
 of the reputation of the consuls themselves? Are we to condemn Lucius Flaccus, a man always most
 diligent in the service of the republic, and in the discharge of his duty as a magistrate, and
 in his priesthood, and in the religious ceremonies over which he presided, as guilty of
 nefarious wickedness and parricide, now that he is dead? And are we to mute with hum in this
 stigma and infamy, after death, the name of even Caius Marius? Are we, I say, to condemn Caius
 Marius now that he is dead, as guilty of nefarious wickedness, and parricide, whom we may
 rightly entitle the father of his country, the parent of your liberties, and of this republic?
 In truth, if Titus Labienus thought himself entitled to
 erect a gibbet in the Campus Martius for Caius
 Rabirius, because he took up arms, what punishment ought to be devised for the man who invited
 him to do so? And if a promise was given to Saturninus, as is constantly asserted by you, it was
 not Caius Rabirius, but Caius Marius who gave it; and it was he too who violated it, if indeed
 it was broken at all. But what promise, O Labienus, could be given except by a resolution of the
 senate? Are you so complete a stranger in this city, are you so ignorant of our constitution and
 of our customs, as to be ignorant of this? Are we to think that you are living as a foreigner in
 a strange town, not bearing office in your own native city?— “Well,” says he, “but what harm can all this now do Caius Marius, since he has no longer any
 feeling or any life?” Is it so? Would Caius Marius have spent his life in such labours and such
 dangers, if he had no hopes and no ideas of any glory which was to extend beyond the limits of
 his own life? No doubt, when he had routed the countless armies of the enemy in Italy , and when he had delivered the city from siege, he thought
 that all his achievements would perish with himself. Such is
 not the truth, O Romans. Nor is there any one among us who exerts himself amid the dangers of
 the republic with virtue and glory, who is not induced to do so by the hope he entertains of
 receiving his reward from posterity—therefore, while there are many reasons why I think that the
 souls of good men are divine and undying, this is the greatest argument of all to my mind, that
 the more virtuous and wise each individual is, the more thoroughly does his mind look forward to
 the future, so as to seem, in fact, to regard nothing except what is eternal.
 Wherefore, I call to witness the souls of Caius Marius and of the other wise men and gallant
 citizens which seem to me to have emigrated from life among men to the holy habitations and
 sacred character of the gods, that I think it my duty to contend for their fame, and glory, and
 memory, no less than for the shrines and temples of my native land; and that if I had to take up
 arms in defence of their credit, I should take them up no less zealously than they took them up
 in defence of the common safety. In truth, O Romans, nature has given us but a limited space to
 live in, but an endless period of glory. 
 Wherefore, if we pay due honour to those who have already died, we shall leave to ourselves a
 more favourable condition after death. But it O Labienus, you neglect those whom we are unable
 any longer to behold, do not you think that at least you ought to consult the interests of these
 men whom you see before you?