DOCSLIB.ORG

The Fall of the Roman Republic

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Fall of the Roman Republic The Fall of the Roman Republic Paul Waring November 6, 2017 Introduction In 44 BC,1 the assassination of Julius Caesar at the hands of a group of disgruntled senators resulted in a power vacuum at the heart of the Roman Republic. Two men, Antony and Octavian, looked set to grasp the mantle of power, and initially they worked closely together to divide up the republic. The arrangement eventually failed though, and plunged Rome into yet another conflict. In this discussion we will be focusing on the lives of Antony and Octavian (later Augustus) and their role in the fall of the Roman Republic, and its transition into an Empire run by one man instead of the Senate. We will examine their early lives and rise to power separately, and then join the two stories together at the point of the Second Triumvirate, an official arrangement between the two men to work together and divide up Rome’s possessions. From there we will take the narrative up until the point of the Second Settlement of Augustus (23), at which point Augustus was secure as the first emperor of Rome, although he was careful not to use that title. The intensity of activity during the period under discussion (c. 44 - 23) and the volume of surviving literary and archaeological material means that we will either mention briefly or skip altogether some of the events which occurred and the people involved. A substantial amount of further reading, both in ancient sources and modern texts, is provided for those who wish to examine the period in more detail. Supporting cast Although the two principal protagonists in our discussion are Antony and Octavian, there are a number of other characters who feature in the narrative, often as allies or enemies (occasionally switching between the two roles) of one or both men. Gaius Marius (c. 157-86) Marius was a successful general who reformed the Roman army, setting into motion the process of its transition from a citizen militia to a professional standing army. Disregarding the rules by holding the consulship on seven occasions,2 and using brute force to achieve his aims, Marius is arguably the man who kick-started the decades of internal strife that finally ended with Octavian’s defeat of Antony. 1All dates are BC unless otherwise indicated. 2A period of ten years was supposed to pass before someone could stand for the consulship again. 1 Marcus Licinius Crassus (c. 115-53) An extraordinarily wealthy man, often reported to have said that a man could only consider himself to be rich if he could afford to pay for his own army. Crassus was a man of great influence in the late republic, primarily because he lent money to many men seeking election. He aligned himself with Pompey and later Caesar as well, but his death at the hands of the Parthians caused the alliance to unravel and plunged Rome into civil war. Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43) A self-proclaimed ‘saviour of the Republic’,3 Cicero was an orator and lawyer who was courted by all sides at various times. Unfortunately he made enemies of the wrong people, particularly Antony, and had no powerful friends to protect him from the proscriptions of the Second Triumvirate. Marcus Aemilius Lepidus (c.88-13) Although the third member of the Second Triumvirate, Lepidus pays a much smaller role in our dis- cussion than Antony and Octavian. He is often portrayed as the weakest member of the triumvirate, although it is difficult to tell whether this is due to a bias in our sources and the fact that his life seems to have been distinctly less exciting than the other two men. Mark Antony (83-30) We must sound a note of caution when analysing Antony and his life, as he ‘lost’ the battle to be- come ruler of Rome, and sources writing in the time of Augustus would have been careful to avoid upsetting the current emperor. In particular, Antony’s association with Cleopatra has earned him a notoriety which may well be undeserved. We also have to bear in mind that he was a trusted lieutenant of Caesar, and by all accounts a competent soldier at the least. Antony was born to a plebian family4 in 83. His grandfather reached the consulship (and, later, the censorship) and received the rare honour of a naval triumph, though he met a sticky end at the hands of Marian assassins. Antony’s father, Marcus Antonius Creticus,5 was considerably less distin- guished. Although he reached the praetorship (one rung below the coveted consulship), he engaged in unsuccessful warfare against the pirates in Crete. Eventually he had to sign an embarrassing treaty to bring the conflict to a close. Given the background of his father and grandfather,6 and particularly as the eldest son, a political and military career looked likely for the young Mark Antony. Indeed this turned out to be the case, and in 57 he served the consul of Syria, Aulus Gabinius, as chief of cavalry.7 In this position he received several distinctions and honours for his military achievements.8 Antony continued to serve 3Cicero, Pro Cnaeo Plancio 36.89 4Romans divided families into two broad social groupings, patricians and plebeians. Patricians were akin to our aris- tocracy, and plebeians were everyone else. 5Like many Roman families, the Antonians had little imagination when it came to names. Unhelpfully for historians, they named the eldest son of each generation Marcus. 6Romans placed great weight on ancestors, and often assumed that if a man’s ancestors had been successful then he would follow in their footsteps. 7Another connection between Antony and Cicero appears here, as Aulus Gabinius was consul in the year of Cicero’s exile – although it was a tribune who brought forward the Leges Clodiae. 8Plutarch, Antony 3 2 under Gabinius during an invasion of Egypt, during which he met Cleopatra for the first time and reportedly fell in love with her.9 Antony’s military career continued to develop and, partly as a result of his political connections, he secured a position on Caesar’s military staff in 54, beginning a relationship which would last until the latter’s assassination. Antony must have impressed Caesar, for after a year of service he was dispatched to Rome to stand for the quaestorship, which he duly attained.10 When Antony’s term of office expired, Caesar promoted him to the rank of legate and placed him in command of two legions. Once the war in Gaul was over, Antony was dispatched back to Rome to protect Caesar’s interests, particularly against Pompey. Caesar secured Antony’s appointment to the College of Augurs, and in 49 Antony was elected as a Tribune of the People. As the tribunes could unilaterally veto proposals from other magistrates, this effectively gave Caesar the ability, through Antony, to halt any action such as attempts to strip him of his command. Unfortunately, Antony’s attempts to resolve the con- flict between Pompey and Caesar failed, and he was forced to flee back to Caesar. After his departure, the Senate passed the senatus consultum ultimum, stripping Caesar of his command, requiring him to return to Rome.11 However, the fact that the office of tribune was sacrosanct gave Caesar the excuse he needed to act. Addressing his troops, he pointed out that the Senate had caused Antony to flee from Rome, and the Thirteenth Legion backed him vigorously.12 Caesar proceeded to cross the Rubicon at the head of an army and plunged Rome into yet another civil war.13 During the Civil War, which we will not discuss in detail, Antony was one of Caesar’s most trusted generals. He was popular with the soldiers, though less so with the wider population,14 and was considered by Caesar to be a ‘capable leader of men’.15 Eventually Caesar got the upper hand against Pompey, pursuing him first to Greece16 and then to Egypt, where Pompey was assassinated, to the despair of Caesar.17 We will now discuss Octavian’s life up until the assassination of Caesar, at which point the two men’s paths come together, resulting in the formation of the Second Triumvirate. Octavian (63 BC - 14 AD) As with Antony’s life, we must be cautious with Octavian. Many of the sources we rely on were written after his death, when the empire was established and his legacy was secure. Born Gaius Octavius, but known to us as Octavian and, as we shall see, Augustus,18 there was noth- 9Appian, Civil Wars 5.8 10Like many Roman military leaders, Caesar attempted wherever possible to ensure that the candidates for election were loyal to him, so that his interests would be secure even when he was out on campaign. 11Caesar, Civil War 1.5 12Caesar, Civil War 1.7 13The crossing of the Rubicon is significant because, although only a small stream, it marked the boundary of Gaul. A governor such as Caesar held his command only in his allocated area (usually a province) and had to relinquish it when returning to Rome (Plutarch, Pompey 60; Plutarch, Caesar 32; Suetonius, Julius Caesar 32). 14Plutarch, Antony 6 15Plutarch, Antony 7 16Pompey had many supporters in Greece due to his earlier military successes there, and he appears to have deliberately withdrawn to build his strength rather than defend Rome. 17Plutarch, Caesar 80 18Octavian used a variety of names during his life. On his adoption in Julius Caesar’s will, he took the name Caesar, a point which was mocked by Antony with the words: ‘you who owe every thing to his name’ (Cicero, Philippics 13.24).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Roman Province of Judea: a Historical Overview
    BYU Studies Quarterly Volume 36 Issue 3 Article 23 7-1-1996 The Roman Province of Judea: A Historical Overview John F. Hall Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq Part of the Mormon Studies Commons, and the Religious Education Commons Recommended Citation Hall, John F. (1996) "The Roman Province of Judea: A Historical Overview," BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 36 : Iss. 3 , Article 23. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol36/iss3/23 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in BYU Studies Quarterly by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Hall: The Roman Province of Judea: A Historical Overview p d tffieffiAinelixnealxAIX romansixulalealliki glnfin ns i u1uaihiihlanilni judeatairstfsuuctfa Published by BYU ScholarsArchive, 1996 1 BYU Studies Quarterly, Vol. 36, Iss. 3 [1996], Art. 23 the roman province judeaofiudeaofofjudea A historical overview john E hall the comingcoining of rome to judea romes acquisition ofofjudeajudea and subsequent involvement in the affairs of that long troubled area came about in largely indirect fashion for centuries judea had been under the control of the hel- lenilenisticstic greek monarchy centered in syria and known as the seleu- cid empire one of the successor states to the far greater empire of alexander the great who conquered the vast reaches of the persian empire toward the end of the fourth century
    [Show full text]
  • Pompey, the Great Husband
    Michael Jaffee Patterson Independent Project 2/1/13 Pompey, the Great Husband Abstract: Pompey the Great’s traditional narrative of one-dimensionally striving for power ignores the possibility of the affairs of his private life influencing the actions of his political career. This paper gives emphasis to Pompey’s familial relationships as a motivating factor beyond raw ambition to establish a non-teleological history to explain the events of his life. Most notably, Pompey’s opposition to the special command of the Lex Gabinia emphasizes the incompatibility for success in both the public and private life and Pompey’s preference for the later. Pompey’s disposition for devotion and care permeates the boundary between the public and private to reveal that the happenings of his life outside the forum defined his actions within. 1 “Pompey was free from almost every fault, unless it be considered one of the greatest faults for a man to chafe at seeing anyone his equal in dignity in a free state, the mistress of the world, where he should justly regard all citizens as his equals,” (Velleius Historiae Romanae 2.29.4). The annals of history have not been kind to Pompey. Characterized by the unbridled ambition attributed as his impetus for pursuing the civil war, Pompey is one of history’s most one-dimensional characters. This teleological explanation of Pompey’s history oversimplifies the entirety of his life as solely motivated by a desire to dominate the Roman state. However, a closer examination of the events surrounding the passage of the Lex Gabinia contradicts this traditional portrayal.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded from Brill.Com10/02/2021 03:34:06PM Via Free Access  F.J
    REDUCING SENATORIAL CONTROL OVER PROVINCIAL COMMANDERS: A FORGOTTEN GABINIAN LAW OF 67BCE F.J. Vervaet I. Introduction At two critical junctures in Roman history, M. Tullius Cicero (cos. ) bit- terly complained that Caesar’s legally-guaranteed second quinquennium in the Gauls and Illyricum (from March to March ) had put him in a formidable position of power vis-à-vis a frustrated Senate.*1 On the th of December , less then a month before the outbreak of civil war between Caesar and his opponents in the Senate, Cicero indicates in Ad Atticum .. (Trebula) that this second five-year term, protected by law, was one of the main factors that had made Caesar nigh-irresistible. He complains, Curimperiumilliautcurillomodoprorogatumest?Curtantooperepugna- tum ut de eius absentis ratione habenda decem tribune pl. ferrent? His ille rebus ita conualuit ut nunc in uno ciui spes ad resistendum sit; qui mallem tantas ei uiris non dedisset quam nunc tam ualenti resisteret. Why was his command extended, and in such a fashion [i.e., in under the terms of the lex Pompeia Licinia]? Why was there such pressure to get the ten tribunes to bring in the law about his candidature in absentia [i.e., for a second consulship in , passed with the support of Cn. Pompeius as consul sine conlega]? By these steps, he has become so strong that hope of resistance now depends on one man; and I would rather that he [i.e., Pompeius] had not given Caesar such formidable strength in the first place than that he should resist him now that he is so powerful.
    [Show full text]
  • Pompey and Cicero: an Alliance of Convenience
    POMPEY AND CICERO: AN ALLIANCE OF CONVENIENCE THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of Texas State University-San Marcos in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of ARTS by Charles E. Williams Jr., B.A. San Marcos, Texas May 2013 POMPEY AND CICERO: AN ALLIANCE OF CONVENIENCE Committee Members Approved: ______________________________ Pierre Cagniart, Chair ______________________________ Kenneth Margerison ______________________________ Elizabeth Makowski Approved: ______________________________ J. Michael Willoughby Dean of the Graduate College COPYRIGHT by Charles E. Williams Jr. 2013 FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94- 553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgment. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, Charles E. Williams Jr., authorize duplication of this work, in whole or in part, for educational or scholarly purposes only. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Above all I would like to thank my parents, Chuck and Kay Williams, for their continuing support, assistance, and encouragement. Their desire to see me succeed in my academic career is perhaps equal to my own. Thanks go as well to Dr Pierre Cagnart, without whom this work would not have been possible. His expertise in Roman politics and knowledge concerning the ancient sources were invaluable. I would also like to thank Dr. Kenneth Margerison and Dr. Elizabeth Makowski for critiquing this work and many other papers I have written as an undergraduate and graduate student.
    [Show full text]
  • Searching for Blood in the Streets: Mapping Political Violence Onto
    Bates College SCARAB Honors Theses Capstone Projects Spring 5-2016 Searching for Blood in the Streets: Mapping Political Violence onto Urban Topography in the Late Roman Republic, 80-50 BCE Theodore Samuel Rube Bates College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scarab.bates.edu/honorstheses Recommended Citation Rube, Theodore Samuel, "Searching for Blood in the Streets: Mapping Political Violence onto Urban Topography in the Late Roman Republic, 80-50 BCE" (2016). Honors Theses. 186. http://scarab.bates.edu/honorstheses/186 This Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Capstone Projects at SCARAB. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of SCARAB. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Searching for Blood in the Streets: Mapping Political Violence onto Urban Topography in the Late Roman Republic, 80-50 BCE An Honors Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Classical and Medieval Studies Bates College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts By Theodore Samuel Rube Lewiston, Maine March 28th, 2016 2 Acknowledgements I want to take this opportunity to express my sincerest gratitude to everybody who during this process has helped me out, cheered me up, cheered me on, distracted me, bothered me, and has made the writing of this thesis eminently more enjoyable for their presence. I am extremely grateful for the guidance, mentoring, and humor of Professor Margaret Imber, who has helped me through every step of this adventure. I’d also like to give a very special thanks to the Bates Student Research Fund, which provided me the opportunity to study Rome’s topography in person.
    [Show full text]
  • Julius Caesar
    Working Paper CEsA CSG 168/2018 ANCIENT ROMAN POLITICS – JULIUS CAESAR Maria SOUSA GALITO Abstract Julius Caesar (JC) survived two civil wars: first, leaded by Cornelius Sulla and Gaius Marius; and second by himself and Pompeius Magnus. Until he was stabbed to death, at a senate session, in the Ides of March of 44 BC. JC has always been loved or hated, since he was alive and throughout History. He was a war hero, as many others. He was a patrician, among many. He was a roman Dictator, but not the only one. So what did he do exactly to get all this attention? Why did he stand out so much from the crowd? What did he represent? JC was a front-runner of his time, not a modern leader of the XXI century; and there are things not accepted today that were considered courageous or even extraordinary achievements back then. This text tries to explain why it’s important to focus on the man; on his life achievements before becoming the most powerful man in Rome; and why he stood out from every other man. Keywords Caesar, Politics, Military, Religion, Assassination. Sumário Júlio César (JC) sobreviveu a duas guerras civis: primeiro, lideradas por Cornélio Sula e Caio Mário; e depois por ele e Pompeius Magnus. Até ser esfaqueado numa sessão do senado nos Idos de Março de 44 AC. JC foi sempre amado ou odiado, quando ainda era vivo e ao longo da História. Ele foi um herói de guerra, como outros. Ele era um patrício, entre muitos. Ele foi um ditador romano, mas não o único.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parthian Rival and Rome's Failure in the East: Roman
    Acta Ant. Hung. 57, 2017, 415–436 DOI: 10.1556/068.2017.57.4.4 NIKOLAUS LEO OVERTOOM THE PARTHIAN RIVAL AND ROME’S FAILURE IN THE EAST: ROMAN PROPAGANDA AND THE STAIN OF CRASSUS Summary: The consequences of Crassus’ invasion of Mesopotamia in 54–53 BCE were unanticipated and unintended; however, his disastrous failure shocked the Roman world and suddenly established the Parthians as a serious rival to Rome. Moreover, the shame the Romans felt after the Battle of Carrhae was considerable. The battle scarred the Roman psyche and severely damaged the Roman ego. This study synthesizes and investigates what became a vicious and virulent Roman literary tradition of anti-Crassus propaganda, examining how numerous Roman writers over the course of numerous centuries used the dead and disgraced Crassus as a convenient scapegoat to help explain Rome’s failure to dominate the East and subdue the Parthian rival. It demonstrates that these writers ignored the legitimate causes for the First Romano-Parthian War (56 BCE – 1 CE), which Crassus had inherited, and illustrates that the disaster at Carrhae became a popular moralizing lesson about the consequences of greed, impiety, and hubris. Key words: Rome, Parthia, Crassus, Warfare, Plutarch, Cassius Dio On a warm, dry day in early May of 53 BCE about 45,000 Roman soldiers and auxil- iaries faced a force of 10,000 battle-hardened Parthian cavalrymen across the rolling fields of Carrhae in northern Mesopotamia. The Roman commander, Marcus Licinius Crassus, who was the triumviral partner of Julius Caesar and Pompey Magnus, had been allotted an eastern command that included the responsibility of concluding the first ever open conflict between Rome and Parthia.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 ` Cicero' on the (Theatre) Stage
    4 CI` CERO' ON THE(THEATRE) STAGE The earliest dramas in which ‘Cicero’ appears on stage as acharacter date from the last quarter of the sixteenth century: apiece in France, one in Germany and (at least) three in Britain were produced in fairly quick succession. In all of these ‘Cicero’ is not the protagonist after whom the plays are named; instead, he is a more or less important figure involved in the dramatic action. 4.1 Robert Garnier, Corne´ lie (1574) Context Robert Garnier ( c. 1545–1590) studied law and did legal work in Paris before becoming amagistrate in his native district of Maine (a region in France) and later amember of the Grand Conseil du Royaume in Paris. From his student days onwards Garnier wrote literary works, starting with lyric and later turning to dramatic poetry.Heisnow regarded as one of the most significant French dramatists of the sixteenth century. The majority of Garnier’splays dramatize stories from the ancient world: Porcie (1568), Corne´ lie (1574), Hippolyte (1574), Marc-Antoine (1578), La Troade (1579) and Antigone (1580). At the same time the themes have contemporary resonance: the pieces share an emphasis on civil war,are characterized by arepublican outlook and were published during the turbulent period of the French Wars of Religion.1 As for their form, Garnier’splays feature little dramatic action and rather consist of an alternation of rhetorically developed speeches and choruses; they are based on the model of Seneca’sLatin tragedies.2 28 R EVIVING C ICEROIN D RAMA Corne´ lie was first performed in 1573; it was first published in 1574 and then included in an edition of Garnier’stragedies in 1585.
    [Show full text]
  • Marc Antony's Assault of Publius Clodius
    MARC ANTONY’S ASSAULT OF PUBLIUS CLODIUS: FACT OR CICERONIAN FICTION? Dean Anthony Alexander (University of Otago) Introduction: Cicero and Truthfulness On account of Asconius’ commentary In Milonianam, scholars have been able to appreciate fully the artful mendacity and dexterous factual manipulation that Cicero employs in his Pro Milone.1 It becomes apparent Cicero believed advocates had the latitude to lie in defence of their client, and could employ what Horace would later term the ‘shining untruth’ (splendide mendax).2 It is for this reason, therefore, that I intend to examine a dubious allegation that Cicero first promotes in his Pro Milone, one which is still widely regarded as true: namely that Marc Antony tried to assassinate Publius Clodius Pulcher in 53 BC.3 This paper seeks to argue that, based on the surviving evidence, Cicero either misrepresents some minor altercation or, perhaps, even invented the episode entirely. While almost all modern scholars accept Cicero’s claim there are, as will be seen, several anomalies that call his charge into question.4 Most notably, if Antony did make a genuine assassination attempt, why, in the wake of Clodius’ actual murder, was he appointed subscriptor to prosecute Milo in 52 BC? Scholars such as Jerzy Linderski and John T. Ramsey have unconvincingly characterized this as an opportunistic volte-face on Antony’s part.5 Even if this were true, however, it does not explain convincingly why Clodius’ family would allow him to participate in the prosecution, if he were estranged from Clodius as Cicero alleges.6 This alone leads one to suspect that Cicero has either misrepresented or even invented the story to discredit Antony.
    [Show full text]
  • Cleopatra : Last Queen of Egypt
    CLEOPATRA B ­ Z7hB 7B6 Cleopatra.indb i 6/12/07 14:50:25 also by joyce tyldesley For Adults Daughters of Isis: Women of Ancient Egypt Hatchepsut: the Female Pharaoh Nefertiti: Egypt’s Sun Queen Th e Mummy Ramesses: Egypt’s Greatest Pharaoh Judgement of the Pharaoh: Crime and Punishment in Ancient Egypt Th e Private Lives of the Pharaohs Egypt’s Golden Empire Pyramids: Th e Real Story Behind Egypt’s Most Ancient Monuments Tales from Ancient Egypt Egypt: How a Lost Civilization was Rediscovered Chronicle of the Queens of Egypt Egyptian Games and Sports For children Mummy Mysteries: Th e Secret World of Tutankhamun and the Pharaohs Egypt (Insiders) Stories from Ancient Egypt Cleopatra.indb ii 6/12/07 14:50:25 CLEOPATRA LAST QUEEN OF EGYPT B ­ Z7hB 7B6 JOYCE TYLDESLEY Cleopatra.indb iii 6/12/07 14:50:25 First published in Great Britain in 2008 by PROFILE BOOKS LTD 3a Exmouth House Pine Street London ec1r 0jh www.profi lebooks.com Copyright © Joyce Tyldesley, 2008 1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2 Designed by Sue Lamble Typeset in Adobe Garamond by MacGuru Ltd [email protected] Printed and bound in Great Britain by Clays, Bungay, Suff olk Th e moral right of the author has been asserted. All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise), without the prior written permission of both the copyright owner and the publisher of this book.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reign of Cleopatra
    THE REIGN OF CLEOPATRA Stanley M. Burstein GREENWOOD PRESS THE REIGN OF CLEOPATRA Greenwood Guides to Historic Events of the Ancient World The Peloponnesian War Lawrence Tritle THE REIGN OF CLEOPATRA Stanley M. Burstein Greenwood Guides to Historic Events of the Ancient World Bella Vivante, Series Editor GREENWOOD PRESS Westport, Connecticut • London To the memory of Dr. Miriam Lichtheim (1914–2004), distinguished Egyptologist and teacher. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Burstein, Stanley Mayer. The reign of Cleopatra / by Stanley M. Burstein. p. cm.—(Greenwood guides to historic events of the ancient world) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0–313–32527–8 (alk. paper) 1. Cleopatra, Queen of Egypt, d. 30 B.C. 2. Egypt—History—332–30 B.C. 3. Queens—Egypt—Biography. I. Title. II. Series. DT92.7.B87 2004 932'.021'092—dc22 2004014672 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available. Copyright © 2004 by Stanley M. Burstein All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, by any process or technique, without the express written consent of the publisher. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2004014672 ISBN: 0–313–32527–8 First published in 2004 Greenwood Press, 88 Post Road West, Westport, CT 06881 An imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. www.greenwood.com Printed in the United States of America The paper used in this book complies with the Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National Information Standards Organization (Z39.48–1984). 10987654321 Excerpts from Business Papers of the Third Century B.C. Dealing with Palestine and Egypt, vol. 2, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Creatures of the Triumvirs: a Study of the Patron-Client Relationship in the Late Roman Republic
    ABSTRACT Creatures of the Triumvirs: A Study of the Patron-Client Relationship in the Late Roman Republic Mallory L. Cormack Director: Kenneth R. Jones, Ph.D. Dr. Erich S. Gruen’s article “P. Clodius: Instrument or Independent Agent?” addressed for the first time the problems inherent to viewing the clients of the Late Roman Republic as merely the puppets of their patrons. This study proposed to examine several major clients—Gabinius, Clodius, and Milo—to determine to what degree they operated under the guidance of their patrons and to what extent they exercised political independence. To do this, the careers of the clients and the primary sources were examined in detail to analyze the influence of the patrons in their respective political actions. In the process of the study, questions were raised about the changes the relationship underwent in the Late Roman Republic and the political role that the patron- client relationship still played. This study found that the clients operated with more freedom than was previously believed and had to contend with a political atmosphere in which alliances were made and sacrificed with equal rapidity. APPROVED BY DIRECTOR OF HONORS THESIS: ________________________________________________ Dr. Kenneth R. Jones, Department of History APPROVED BY THE HONORS PROGRAM: ________________________________________________ Dr. Elizabeth Corey, Director DATE: _______________________ CREATURES OF THE TRIUMVIRS: A STUDY OF THE PATRON-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP IN THE LATE ROMAN REPUBLIC A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Baylor University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Honors Program By Mallory L. Cormack Waco, Texas May 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Patronage in Roman Society: a Brief Introduction .
    [Show full text]