Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:11:54.047Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Caesar, the Senate and Italy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2013

Ronald Syme
Get access

Extract

The central and revolutionary period of Roman history runs from the tribunate of Tiberius Gracchus to Augustus' seizure of sole power and establishment of a constitutional monarchy. Caesar's heir prevailed through the name of Caesar—‘puer qui omnia nomini debes’; and he perpetuated the name, as title, cult and system, to distant ages. Yet Augustus as Princeps did not invoke Caesar's rule to provide precedent and validity for his own. Quite the reverse. What rank and role in the transformation of the Roman State should therefore be assigned to the Dictatorship of Caesar—mere episode or cardinal moment and organic part?

The problem is large, the debate continuous and acute. During the last generation, opinions about Caesar's imperial policy and the shape which he intended to give to the Roman State have ranged to the widest extremes, roping in for parallel or contrast the figures of Sulla, Pompeius and Augustus.

Type
Research Article
Information
Papers of the British School at Rome , Volume 14 , November 1938 , pp. 1 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © British School at Rome 1938

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 About the whole question there must now be consulted Gagé's valuable paper: ‘De César à Auguste: où en est le problème des origines du principat,’ Rev. hist. clxxvii, 1936, 279 ffGoogle Scholar. It is not only a compte-rendu, but an original contribution.

2 ‘Kaiser Augustus,’ Hist. Zeitschr. xci, 1903, 385 ffGoogle Scholar. = Kl. Schr. (1910), 443 ff.; Caesars Monarchie u. das Principat des Pompejus (1919; ed. 3, 1922).

3 ‘La royauté de César,’ Points de vue sur l' impérialisme remain (1934), 89 ff.; Histoire romaine (1936), ii, César.

4 Pelham, Essays on Roman History (1911), 25 ff.; Holmes, Rice, The Roman Republic (1923) iii, 336Google Scholar; Rostovtzeff, Soc. and Ec. History of the Roman Empire (1926), 28.

5 CAH ix, 718 ff.

6 Suetonius, Divus Iulius 79,4, on which Meyer (Caesars Monarchie 3, 521) remarks, ‘zweifellos durchaus zutreffend’: it has been taken fairly seriously by Mommsen, Reden u. Aufsätze, 173 f., and Warde Fowler, R. Essays and Interpretations, 216 ff. (with ref. to Horace, , Odes 3, 3, 37 ff.Google Scholar). There is no indication that Suetonius believed what he retails as rumour (‘varia fama percrebruit’).

7 ‘Nec minoris impotentiae voces propalam edebat, ut Titus Ampius scribil, nihil esse rem publkam, appellationem modo sine corpore ac specie. Sullam nescisse litteras qui dictaturam deposuerit. debere homines consideratius iam loqui secum ac pro legibus habere quae dicat’ (Suetonius, Divus Iulius 77). Carcopino (Points de vue, 94) can hardly be right in assigning these utterances to Caesar's early years. Both content and context are against that. On the political sentiments of T. Ampius Balbus, cf. esp. Cicero, , Ad fam. 6, 12, 3Google Scholar.

8 Caesars Monarchie 3, vi (preface), ‘die Monarchie Caesars darzustellen als Gegenbild zu dem Prinzipat des Augustus.’

9 Cf. Gagé, J., Rev. hist. clxxvii, 1936, 324, 336Google Scholar.

10 Cf. J. Gagé, ibid., 342; also Levi, M. A., Riv. di fil. lxiii, 1935, 404Google Scholar (review of CAH x). Levi's excellent Ottaviano Capoparte, 1933, helps to bridge the gap.

11 Essays on Roman History, 27.

12 Cf. esp. Nock, , CAH x, 489Google Scholar.

13 Wickert, L., ‘Zu Caesars Reichspolitik,’ Klio xxx, 1937, 232 ffGoogle Scholar.

14 H. Rudolph, Stadt u. Staat im römischen Italien (1935): on his main thesis, cf. especially SirJones, H. Stuart, JRS xxvi, 1936, 268 ff.Google Scholar; M. Cary, ibid., xxvii, 1937, 48 ff.; R. Meiggs, CR 1935, 235 ff.

15 Comm. Pet. 31. He did not need Quintus' advice here.

16 ‘Sallust,’ In Cic. 4, 7; Macrobius 2, 3, 5 (a joke of Vatinius—‘unde ergo tibi varices?’).

17 Pro Sulla 23. This important passage invalidates an argument of Rudolph, Stadt u. Staat, 158.

18 Pro Sulla 24.

19 Pro Plancio 19 ff. (Atina). On the hypothesis that Caelius Rufus came from Tusculum, cf. Münzer, P-W, s.v. ‘M. Caelius Rufus,’ 1267. There was an important family of Caelii here (CIL xiv, 2624, 2627); and the consul of A.D. 17, C. Caelius Rufus, was aedile at Tusculum, (CIL xiv, 2622Google Scholar).

20 ILS 212, col. ii, init. For the interpretation, see especially Last, H. M., JRS xxii, 1932, 232Google Scholar (review of Momigliano, , L'opera dell' imperatore Claudio) and JRS xxiv, 1934, 59 fGoogle Scholar. (review of Carcopino, Points de vue sur l' impérialisme romain). As there emphasized, the primordial meaning of the phrase ‘coloniae et municipia’ is ‘the towns of Italy’ (but in antithesis, be it noted, not to the provinces, but to Rome): and though the phrase can be extended to cover communities in the provinces (e.g. ILS 214), the context in the Oratio Claudi Caesaris is against that. For the class of men referred to by Claudius, note the phrase ‘equites et viri boni ac locupletes’ used by Cicero's brother (Comm. Pet. 53).

21 ILS 932.

22 ILS 5925. Of the two family names which he bears, each is found only at Canusium: Sotidius, , CIL ix, 349 and 397Google Scholar; Libuscidius, 338, 348, 387, 6186. See W. Schulze, Zur Gesch. lateinischer Eigennamen, 236 and 359, for the evidence about each name, separately impressive: if combined, the result is almost incredible.

23 C. Vibius Postumus (cos. suff. A.D. 5) and A. Vibius Habitus (cos. suff. A.D. 7) certainly came from Larinum, , cf. CIL ix, 730Google Scholar: earlier members of the family are mentioned in Cicero's speech for their fellow-townsman A. CluentiusHabitus, namely Sex. Vibius and C. Vibius Capax (Pro Cluentio 25 and 165). C. Poppaeus Sabinus and Q. Poppaeus Secundus, consul and consul suffect respectively in A.D. 9, presumably came from the small town of Interamna Praetuttianorum in Picenum (cf. ILS 5671 and 6562). Papius Mutilus is no doubt a descendant of the Samnite leader of the Bellum Italicum (cf. Last, H. M., CAH x, 455Google Scholar): but he is not a novel or unique phenomenon.

24 Pro Sulla 24.

25 Philippic 3, 15, ‘videte quam despiciamur omnes qui sumus e municipiis, id est omnes plane: quotus enim quisque nostrum non est?’

26 Such as Cn. Domitius Afer, a consular, and Domitius Decidius, the father-in-law of Agricola, in high favour with the government to judge by his promotion, ILS 966: Claudius speaks only of Valerius Asiaticus—‘dirum latronis nomen’—and his brother, the one dead, the other expelled, and the Roman knight L. Vestinus.

27 Tacitus, , Ann. 3, 28Google Scholar.

28 Caesar, , BC 3, 1, 4Google Scholar—note that Caesar (deliberately) mentions only the men condemned under the domination of Pompeius—‘illis temporibus quibus in urbe praesidia legionum Pompeius habuerat.’

29 And even under Augustus and as late as Claudius the tribunate can be used as a method of entry to the Senate for men who have not held the quaestorship (Dio 54, 30, 2; 56, 27, 1; 60, 11). Note also the inscriptions, ILS 916 and 945; L'ann. ép., 1925, 85.

30 Dio 43, 47, 2.

31 Dio 43, 51, 3.

32 Dio 42, 51, 3; 43, 47, 2; 49, 1; 51, 4.

33 Dio 43,49, 1.

34 As shown by Mommsen, , ‘Die Zahl der r. Provinzen in Caesars Zeit,’ Ges. Schr. iv, 169 ffGoogle Scholar.

35 Dio 42, 51, 5; 43, 27, 2; 47, 3.

36 Dio 43, 47, 3.

37 Appian, (BC 1, 59, 267Google Scholar; 100, 468), as interpreted by Hardy, E. G., ‘The Number of the Sullan Senate,’ JRS vi, 1906, 59 ff.Google Scholar; cf. Last, H. M., CAH ix, 209Google Scholar (cf. 286) and O'Brien Moore, P-W, s.v. ‘Senatus,’ 686. Carcopino (Histoire romaine) omits the lectio of 88.

38 Willems, P., Le sénat de la république romaine (1885), i, 403 ff.Google Scholar; Bennett, H., Cinna and his Times, Diss. Chicago (1923), 43 fGoogle Scholar. A lectio was certainly held in 86, cf. Cicero, De domo sua 84.

39 Orosius 5, 22, 4; Eutropius 5, 9, 2; cf. H. Bennett, op. cit. 35.

40 Dio 37, 46, 4.

41 This may seem improbable, but is admitted by Lengle (P-W, s.v. ‘Tribunus,’ 2489). The Plebiscitum Atinium (Aulus Gellius 14, 8, 2) gave ex-tribunes a seat in the Senate. On the date of this important measure, cf. Willems, P., Le sénat i, 228 ffGoogle Scholar. (c. 119 B.C.?); J. Carcopino, Histoire romaine, 338 f. (103 B.C. ?).

42 C. Norbanus was tribune before being quaestor, Münzer, F., ‘C. Norbanus,’ Hermes lxvii, 1932, 220 fGoogle Scholar.

43 Livy, Per. 98; for the names, Willems, P., Le sénat i, 417 ffGoogle Scholar.

44 Dio 37, 46, 4, ὑπὲρ τὸν ἀριθμόν.

45 Dio 40, 63, 4, πάντας μὲν τοὺς ἐκ τῶν ἀπελευθέρων, συχνοὺς δὲ καὶ τῶν πάνυ γενναίων; Horace, , Sat. 1, 6, 20 fGoogle Scholar.

46 Dio 47, 15, 4, ὣστε χρυσὸν τὴν τοῦ Καίσαρος μοναρχίαν ϕανῆναι.

47 Cicero, , Ad Att. 9, 10, 7Google Scholar; cf. 9, 18, 2 (νέκυια).

48 Römische Adelsparteien u. Adelsfamilien (1920), 347 ff., esp. 358.

49 The most important is as follows: Dio 42, 51, 5; 43, 27, 2; 20, 2; 47, 3; 48, 22, 3; Suetonius, , Divus Iulius 76, 3Google Scholar; 80, 2; Cicero, , Ad fam. 6, 18, 1Google Scholar; De div. 2, 23; De off. 2, 29; Phil. 11, 12; 13, 27; Seneca, , Contr. 7, 3, 9Google Scholar; Macrobius 2, 3, 11.

50 The most definite description of their status comes from Dio (42, 51, 5), τοὺς δὲ ἱππέας τούς τεἑκατοντάρχους καὶ τοὺς ὑπομείονας; (43, 47, 3), . Dio says nothing of provincials, a remarkable omission.

51 Friedländer, L., Sittengeschichte 1 10, 107Google Scholar; E. Meyer, Caesars Monarchie 3, 463 f.; A. Stein, Der. r. Ritterstand, 208; J. Carcopino, Histoire romaine, 933; Dessau, H., Gesch. der r. Kaiserzeit i, 1924, 18Google Scholar; cf. 94. Cf., however, Adcock, , CAH ix, 729 f.Google Scholar, a welcome exception.

52 Ad fam. 6, 18, 1.

53 Gesch. der r. Kaiserzeit i, 1924, 94Google Scholar, ‘Landsknechte waren unter ihnen und Spieler.’

54 Die Nobilität der r. Republik (1912), 11.

55 Cicero, , Phil. 10, 22Google Scholar—perhaps a typical term for centurions.

56 C. Fuficius Fango, or a member of his family, was an aedile at Acerrae, (CIL x, 3758Google Scholar); and N. Granonius was quattuorvir at Luceria at some stage in his career, perhaps between two centurionates (ILS 2224).

57 On the jury-panels, cf. Cicero, , Phil. 1, 20Google Scholar. On excenturions passing into the equestris militia, note, under Augustus, T. Marius Siculus (Val. Max. 7, 8, 6 with CIL xi, 6058), cf. A. Stein, Der r. Ritterstand, 160 f., and on the whole question of centurions, Syme, R., JRS xxvii, 1937, 129Google Scholar; to which add, from the triumviral period, L. Firmius (ILS 2226). L. Septimius, the assassin of Pompeius, had been a centurion and is described by Caesar as ‘tribunus militum’ (BC 3, 104, 2)—but that was at Alexandria. The subject is large and important—and calls for more thorough investigation than can here be given.

58 Sallust, , Hist. 1, 55Google Scholar Maur., cf. Orosius 5, 21, 3 (‘primipilaris’); Plutarch, Sulla 31; Sertorius 12.

59 Dio 48, 22, 3, ἓν τε γὰρ τῷ μισθοφορικῷ ἐστράτευτο. Cf. Cicero, , Ad Att. 14, 10, 2Google Scholar.

60 Cicero, Phil. 11, 12; 13, 27; 14, 10 etc. On Saxa, cf. Syme, R., ‘Who was Decidius Saxa?’ JRS xxvii, 1937, 128 ffGoogle Scholar. It is not certain whether Cafo (an ex-centurion never mentioned apart from Saxa) was also a senator, JRS xxvii, 135 f. Tebassus and Scaeva (Cicero, , Ad Att. 14, 10, 2Google Scholar) were probably not, JRS xxvii, 128. Scaeva is merely a type of Caesarian centurion—in fact, the type (BC 3, 53).

61 Cicero, , De off. 2, 29Google Scholar (without the name); cf. Sallust, , Hist. 1, 55Google Scholar Maur.: presumably the Q. Cornelius who was quaestor urbanus in 44 (Josephus, , AJ 14, 219Google Scholar).

62 M. Gelzer, Die Nobilität der r. Republik, 10. Cicereius, an ex-scribe, was praetor in 173 B.C. (Val. Max. 3, 5, 1; 4, 5, 3). The Fasti triumphales from Urbisaglia, L'ann. ép., 1926, 121, also attest his origin.

63 Tacitus, , Ann. 11, 24Google Scholar, ‘libertinorum filiis magistrates mandare non, ut plerique falluntur, repens, sed priori populo factitatum est.’

64 Cicero, Pro Cluentio 132, ‘negat hoc Lentulus; nam Popilium, quod erat libertini filius, in senatum non legit, locum quidem senatorium ludis et cetera ornamenta relinquit et eum omni ignominia liberat.’

65 T. Annius Cimber, ‘Lysidici filius.’ (Cicero, , Phil. 3, 14Google Scholar) may be one of Caesar's new senators. It is not certain when M. Maecius, suspect of servile extraction (Plutarch, Cicero 27), entered the Senate. A freedman's son C. Thoranius (? Toranius) is attested in the Senate in 25 B.C. (Dio 53, 27, 6).

66 The Tacitean orator (Ann. 13, 27) exaggerates wildly when he says ‘et plurimis equitum, plerisque senatoribus non aliunde originem trahi.’

67 Suetonius 76, 3, cf. 80, 2. Neither Dio nor Cicero mentions this. Yet a strong hint in Cicero, (Ad fam. 9, 15, 2Google Scholar) ‘cum in urbem nostram est infusa peregrinitas, nunc vero etiam bracatis et Transalpinis nationibus.’

68 A Spanish origin, from Sucro, was alleged against Q. Varius, tr. pl. 90 B.C., ‘propter obscurum ius civitatis Hybrida cognominatus’ (Val. Max. 8, 6, 4, cf. 3, 7, 8; As conius, In Scaur. 20 (Clark, p. 22); Quintilian 5, 12, 10; Auctor de viris illustribus 72). Further, Verres' quaestor Q. Caecilius may have been of Sicilian origin (Div. in Q. Caec. 39; Pseudo-Asconius, p. 98, Or.=Stangl ii, 185). F. Münzer, P-W, s.v. ‘Q. Caecilius Niger,’ 1231, says ‘ein Sicilier von Geburt’; cf. also Frank, Tenney, ‘On the Migration of Romans to Sicily,’ AJP lvi, 1935, 61 ffGoogle Scholar.

69 Velleius 2, 51, 3. Balbus was quaestor in 44 B.C. His uncle was elevated, it appears, not by Caesar, but by the Triumvirs, becoming consul in 40 B.C., cf. Pliny, , NH 7, 136Google Scholar.

70 Cf. JRS xxvii, 1937, 132Google Scholar. To the evidence about nomenclature there given add the proscribed Samnite Cn. Decidius (Cicero, Pro Cluentio 161; Tacitus, Dial. 21).

71 Bell. Afr. 28, 2, ‘duo Titii Hispani adulescentes, tribuni militum legionis V, quorum pattern Caesar in senatum legerat.’ The cognomen ‘Hispanus’ is not certain evidence, In favour of Spanish origin, however, cf. now Münzer, P-W, s.v. ‘Titius,’ 1557.

72 Compare Cicero on the maternal grandfather of L. Piso (interpreted in JRS xxvii, 130 f.). Caesar naturally championed men from the Transpadana. L. Hostilius Saserna (from Verona?) may be one of his new senators, cf. Münzer, P-W, s.v., 2514. We have it only on the authority of the scholiast on Horace, , Sat. 1, 3, 130Google Scholar, that P. Alfenus Varus (cos. suff. 39 B.C.) came from Cremona.

73 Cf. JRS xxvii, 1937, 131Google Scholar. On the family of Procillus, see Caesar, , BG I, 19, 4Google Scholar; 47, 4 and 53, 5; 7, 65, 1; on the problem of his name, cf. T. Rice Holmes, Caesar's Conquest of Gaul 2, 652. For Trogus, Justin 43, 5, 11 f.

74 On the hypothesis that his father Cn. Cornelius was a Gallic notable who received the franchise from a Cn. Cornelius Lentulus, either Clodianus (cos. 72) or Marcellinus (cos. 56), cf. Syme, R., ‘The Origin of Cornelius Gallus,’ CQ xxxii, 1938, 39ffGoogle Scholar.

75 As Paullinus is described by Pliny, as ‘paterna gente pellitus’ (NH 33, 143Google Scholar), an ancestor was probably a native dynast of Arelate or its vicinity who received the citizenship from Pompeius. Paullinus was suffect consul c. A.D. 54. The thesis about Narbonensian senators here adumbrated is strengthened by the presence of municipal aristocrats with names like ‘L. Domitius Axiounus’ and ‘Pompeia Toutodivicis f(ilia)’ on early inscriptions of Nemausus (ILS 6976 f.). Narbonensis was very much under the protection of the Domitii. They lost it to Pompeius, Pompeius to Caesar.

76 Dio 42, 51, 5, τοὺς ὑπομείονας compare also 52, 42, 1 (on the state of the Senate in 27 B.C. after the Civil Wars) .

77 Caesars Monarchie 3, 463 f.

78 Histoire romaine, 933.

79 Le sénat i, 427 ff. In 61 B.C., excluding magistrates, about 417 (Cicero, , Ad Att. 1, 14, 5Google Scholar); likewise in 57 B.C., 415 (Cicero, Post red. in senatu 26); in 49 B.C., 392 (Appian, , BC 2, 30, 119Google Scholar).

80 Ribbeck, P., Senatus Romanus qui fuerit Idibus Martiis anni A.U.C. 710, Diss. Berlin, 1899Google Scholar.

81 Willems, , Le sénat i, 565 ffGoogle Scholar. These are very obscure personages, the first senators known of their families.

82 M. Lurius, an admiral serving for Octavianus in Sardinia in 40 B.C. (Dio 48, 30, 7) and commanding the right wing at Actium (Velleius 2, 85, 1), is otherwise unknown. C. Volusenus, Caesar's experienced equestrian officer (BG 3, 5, 2 etc.; BC 3, 60, 4) certainly deserved senatorial rank. There is no evidence that he received it.

83 Cicero, , Ad fam. 8, 8, 6Google Scholar.

84 Cicero, , Ad fam. 11, 16, 2Google Scholar. He became aedile in 45 B.C. (Ad Att. 13, 45, 1).

85 Cicero, Pro C. Rabirio Postumo 3.

86 Ad Att. 13, 49, 2. The identity of C. Rabirius Postumus and the Caesarian Curtius has been argued (and I think proved, despite the doubts of Vonder Mühll, P-W, s.v. ‘C.Rabirius Postumus,’ 25 ff.) by Dessau, , Hermes xlvi, 1911, 613 ffGoogle Scholar.

87 The History of Rome (E. T. 1901), v, 200.

88 Caesars Monarchie 3, 347, ‘bei der römischen Nation dagegen, in dem gesunden Teil der Bevölkerung Italiens, konnte Caesar im Kampf gegen die Republik kaum irgendwo auf Sympathien hoffen.’

89 Ad Att. 8, 13, 2, ‘nihil prorsus aliud curant nisi agros, nisi villulas, nisi nummulos suos’: ibid., 7, 7, 5; 8, 16, 1.

90 BC 1, 13, 1: for ‘tantis rebus gestis,’ cf. Suetonius, Divus Iulius 30, 4.

91 BC 1, 15: for the Picene origin of Labienus, cf. Cicero, Pro C. Rabirio perduellionis reo 22; Italicus, SiliusPunica 10, 32Google Scholar.

92 ILS 877.

93 Livy, Per. 98. Some have been shocked by this low figure. It is quite credible, as Frank, Tenney shows, ‘Roman Census Statistics from 225 to 28 B.C.,’ CP xix, 1924, 333 fGoogle Scholar.

94 P. Sulpicius was married to a Iulia (Val. Max. 6, 7, 3, cf. Münzer, P-W, s.v. ‘Iulia’ (n. 544), 893). One would be tempted to conjecture a relationship with the democratic tribune of 88 B.C.

95 Carcopino, Histoire romaine, 476.

96 E.g., Charlesworth, M. P., CAH x, 83Google Scholar, ‘the statesmanship of two generations before had produced out of civil war a people and made a nation of what had once been a city.’ F. B. Marsh (A History of the Roman World from 146 to 30 B.C., 423) likewise anticipates when saying that the Social War ‘welded the population of Italy into a single nation.’ Note the firm observations of Last in this matter, CAH x, 425–8Google Scholar.

97 I hope to treat this subject elsewhere.

98 Livy, Per. 73.

99 Dio 49, 21, 1 f.; Aulus Gellius 15, 4; Velleius 2, 65, 3; Pliny, , NH 7, 135Google Scholar; Val. Max. 6, 9, 9.

100 Cicero, ap. Pliny, , NH 7, 135Google Scholar; Ad fam. 10, 18, 3 (Plancus).

101 Gellius 15, 4, 3.

102 Cf. M. Gelzer, Die Nobilität der r. Republik, 11.

103 Plutarch, Pompeius 6 (referred to by Gelzer, but not by other modern historians of the period), .

104 Dio 48, 41, 1. On ‘Poppaedius,’ the true form of the name, see W. Schulze, Zur Gesch. lateinischer Eigennamen, 367. It is not stated, it is true, that this man acquired senatorial rank from Caesar; he might only have held the quaestorship after Caesar's death.

105 Strabo, p. 241, . Cf. ‘dux et auctor’ (Florus 2, 6, 10).

106 Florus 2, 6, 6.

107 Cf. F. Münzer, P-W, s.v. ‘Staius,’ 2136; ‘L. Staius Murcus,’ 2136 ff. Note the inscription (ILS 885) from Introdacqua nr. Sulmo. Münzer suggests that this may well be his home … but there were no Paelignian senators before Augustus (ILS 932). Dolabella's legate M. Octavius Marsus (Cicero, , Phil. 11, 4Google Scholar; Dio 47, 30, 5) could also raise a claim.

108 A certain C. Urbinius was quaestor in Spain under Metellus Pius (Sallust, , Hist. 2, 70Google Scholar Maur.): an Urbinia married Clusinius, a Marrucine (Quintilian 7, 2, 26), and Pollio was concerned in a famous law-suit, defending her heirs against a man who alleged that he was a son of Clusinius.

109 Indeed, the notorius Milo was a Papius by birth; he was adopted by his maternal grandfather, T. Annius of Lanuvium (Asconius, , In Milonianam 47 = p. 53Google Scholar Clark).

110 Bell. Afr. 57, 4.

111 Dion. Hal. 5, 77, 5, ἐκ τῶν ἐπιτυχόντων ἀνθρώπων. Sallust, , BC 37, 6Google Scholar, ‘quod ex gregariis militibus alios senatores videbant.’ The ‘gregarii milites’ are an exaggeration for ex-centurions, on which see above, n. 55. Livy, Per. 89 and Appian, BC 1, 100, 468Google Scholar tell a different story.

112 Last, H. M. in CAH ix, 286Google Scholar.

113 J. Carcopino, Sylla ou la monarchic manquée (1931), 65, ‘évitant à dessein les families sénatoriales’; Histoire romaine (1935), 455.

114 Hill, H., ‘Sulla's New Senators in 81 B.C.,’ CQ xxvi, 1932, 170 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar. Livy (Per. 89) describes the Senate as being recruited ‘ex equestri ordine,’ Appian, (BC 1, 100, 468Google Scholar), ἐκ τῶν ἐπιτυχόντων ἀνθρώπων. This evidence is not the only support for Hill's thesis—he made an extensive prosopographical examination.

115 Velleius 2, 16, 2, ‘cuius illi pietati plenam populus Romanus gratiam rettulit, ipsum viritim civitate donando, duos filios eius creando praetores, cum seni adhuc crearentur.’

116 Appian, , BC 4, 25, 102Google Scholar, .

117 Schur, W., ‘Homo novus,’ Bonner Jahrbücher cxxxiv, 1929, 54 ffGoogle Scholar.

118 SIG 3 747, 10: on the name, W. Schulze, Zur Gesch. lateinischer Eigennamen, 523.

119 Cicero, Brutus 242 (cf. Pro Cluentio 57), ‘eodem tempore C. L. Caepasii fratres fuerunt, qui multa opera, ignoti homines et repentini, quaestores celeriter facti sunt, oppidano quodam et incondito genere dicendi.’ W. Schulze, op. cit., 351, gives only one other example of this name, CIL iii, 1404;. The first consul with a name terminating in ‘-asius’ is Sex. Vitulasius Nepos (A.D. 78).

120 Pro Caecina 28.

121 Asconius, , In Corn. 72 (p. 81Google Scholar Clark), ‘contemptissimum nomen electum esse … apparet.’

122 Zur Gesch. lateinischer Eigennamen, 1904.

123 Le sénat i, 181; Schulze, op. cit., 104 f.

124 ‘Italische Namen u. Stämme,’ Klio ii, 1902, 167 ff., 440 ff.Google Scholar; and iii, 1903, 235 ff.

125 Cicero, Pro Milone 37 (cf. Rinkes, S. H., Mnemosyne x, 1861, 216Google Scholar).

126 Asconius, In Mil. 28 (p. 32 Clark); cf. Plutarch, Pompeius 64.

127 Münzer, R. Adelspaneien u. Adelsfamilien, 47 f.

128 Viz. (excepting Caesar and including Dolabella, cos. suff. 44) nobiles, P. Servilius Isauricus, M. Aemilius Lepidus, Q. Fabius Maximus, M. Antonius, P. Cornelius Dolabella: novi homines, Q. Fufius Calenus, C. Trebonius, P. Vatinius, C. Caninius Rebilus.

129 Cicero, , Ad Att. 8, 11, 2Google Scholar, ‘dominatio quaesita ab utroque est’; Tacitus, , Hist. 2, 38Google Scholar; Ann. 3, 28.

130 M. Lollius Palicanus, tr. pl. 71, was ‘humili loco Picens loquax magis quam facundus’ (Sallust, , Hist. 4, 43Google Scholar Maur.): he thought of standing for the consulate in 67, Val. Max. 3, 8, 3. As for Pompeius' man Afranius (cos. 60 B.C.), note the inscr. ILS 878 (between Asculum and Cupra Maritima). Further, one might assume with some confidence that T. Labienus began, as he ended, in loyalty to Pompeius. The Picene following of the Pompeii can clearly be detected in the consilium of Pompeius Strabo at Asculum (ILS 8888), cf. C. Cichorius, R. Studien, esp. 157 ff.

131 Caesar, , BC 1, 18, 1Google Scholar.

132 The elder Balbus got the citizenship from Pompeius: so did the Vocontian dynast, father of Caesar's secretary Trogus; and Cornelius Gallus' father may have owed it to a Cn. Lentulus in the service of Pompeius in Gaul, and Spain, (cf. CQ xxxii, 1938, 39 ff.Google Scholar). Gallus first emerges into authentic history as the friend of the Caesarian Pollio (Cicero, , Ad fam. 10, 32, 5Google Scholar).

133 Laberius, ap. Gellius 16, 7, 12,

‘duas uxores? hercle hoc plus negoti est, inquit cocio; sex aediles viderat.’

134 Ad fam. 10, 26, 2.

135 Dio 48, 43 (38 B.C.).

136 Dio 43, 51, 3; Suetonius, , Divus Iulius 41, 2Google Scholar; Cicero, , Phil. 7, 16Google Scholar.

137 Tacitus, , Ann. 2, 43Google Scholar.

138 Suetonius, , Divus Aug. 35, 1Google Scholar.

139 Cicero, , Phil. 13, 28Google Scholar, ‘apertam curiam vidit post Caesaris mortem: mutavit calceos: pater conscriptus repente factus est.’ For other statements about new senators after Caesar's death see Appian, , BC 3, 5, 17Google Scholar; Plutarch, Antonius 15. Yet nothing about this in Cicero's criticism of Antonius' management of the acta of Caesar (e.g., where one might expect it, in Phil. 1, 24—‘de exilio reducti a mortuo’ etc).

140 Dio 48, 34, 4, .

141 Dio 52, 42, 1.

142 Dio 48, 34, 5; Jerome, Chron., Ol. 284, p. 158 H; Digest 1, 14, 3.

143 Velleius 2, 71, 2, ‘non aliud bellum cruentius caede clarissimorum virorum fuit.’

144 Suetonius, , Divus Aug. 35, 1Google Scholar; Dio 52, 42, 1.

145 Dio 52, 42, 1–3.

146 E.g., ‘Caesarian interlopers’, M. Hammond, The Augustan Principate (1933), 22 and 116.

147 Over seven hundred senators fought on Augustus' side in the War of Actium (Res Gestae 25, 3); but the total of the senate was over a thousand (Suetonius, , Divus Aug. 35, 1Google Scholar; Dio 52, 42, 1).

148 Dio 51, 4, 6.

149 Pliny, , NH 18, 37Google Scholar.

150 Velleius 2, 89, 3.

151 Dio 56, 25, 4.

152 Tacitus, , Ann. 1, 14Google Scholar.

153 Tacitus, , Ann. 1, 2Google Scholar.

154 Dio 54, 13 f.

155 Cf. Mommsen, , Staatsrecht I 3, 568 fGoogle Scholar. Against this, however, cf. J. Carcopino, 'La naissance de Jules César, Mélanges Bidez (1934), 35 ff., esp. 60 f.

156 The provision is attested as early as 24 B.C. in the dispensation accorded to Tiberius, of five years, permitting him to be quaestor in his twentieth year, Dio 53, 28, 3. Its origin may belong to an earlier date (29–8 B.C.?). Likewise the reduction by ten years in the age required for the consulate. L. Calpurnius Piso (cos. 15 B.C.) was certainly consul in his thirty-third year. Also Ahenobarbus (cos. 16 B.C.)? He had been aedile in 22 B.C. (Suetonius, Nero 4), therefore perhaps quaestor in 24 B.C.

157 Suetonius, Divus Aug. 46.

158 And to a Roman it was no ‘novus mos’ to bring in novi homines—‘neque novus hie mos senatus populique Romani est putandi quod optimum sit esse nobilissimum’ (Velleius 2, 128, 1), a phrase which suitably illustrates the observation of the Emperor Claudius (ILS 212, col. II init.).

159 For valuable improvements in form and substance, the writer is deeply in the debt of the Camden Professor and of Mr. Meiggs.