DOCSLIB.ORG

The Imperium of Cn. Calpurnius Piso*

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Imperium of Cn. Calpurnius Piso* THE IMPERIUM OF CN. CALPURNIUS PISO* The First Catilinarian Conspiracy has long been the object of scholarly endeavour thanks both to the unreliability of our sources and the ingenuity of scholars in remedying this lacuna. Although valuable studies have served to weed out some of the more extravagant fabrications1 an accurate under- standing of the events remains elusive. Several important aspects of the alleged conspiracy have not been adequately explained and it is my inten- tion to consider the appointment of the conspirator Cn. Calpurnius Piso as Quaestor ProPraetore and governor of the province of Hispania Citerior. It is my contention that Piso has been the victim of posthumous denigration and that his appointment need not be viewed either in the context of the ‘con- spiracy’ of 66/65 BC or the anti-Pompeian politics of the mid to late 60s BC. A lengthy excursus on the events of the years 66-65 BC would be super- fluous, although a brief outline of the background may help us to view Piso’s position in its proper context. In the course of the electoral shenanigans of the summer of 66 BC, the consules designati P. Autronius Paetus and P. Cornelius Sulla were found guilty of electoral bribery, fresh elections were held in the autumn and their accusers L. Manlius Torquatus and L. Aurelius Cotta were returned victorious (Asc. 75; Dio Cass. XXXVI 44.3). The summer also saw the return to Rome of the governor of Africa, L. Sergius Catilina, to face accusations of maladministration (Asc. 85). Seeking to escape prosecu- tion Catiline offered himself for election, only to have his candidacy rejected by the presiding consul, L. Volcatius Tullus2. The reasons for * Journal sigla in the notes are those of L’Année Philologique. 1 Cf. R. SEAGER, The First Catilinarian Conspiracy, Historia 13 (1964), p. 338-347; E.S. GRUEN, Notes on the ‘First Catilinarian Conspiracy’, CPh 64 (1969), p. 20-24. Pre- vious studies have focused almost exclusively on Piso’s relationship to the events of the so-called ‘First Catilinarian Conspiracy’, neglecting his role in Spain. A notable exception to this is the study by L. AMELA VALVERDE, El asesinato de Cn. Calpurnio Pisón, Gerión 20 (2002), p. 255-279; however, Amela Valverde persists in placing Piso’s appointment in the context of Crassus’ anti-Pompeian stance. I feel, therefore, that now would be an appropriate time to reconsider the evidence for Piso’s appointment and to place his com- mand in the context of the Spanish provinces in the period prior to Pompey’s appointment in 55 BC. 2 Sallust, Cat. 18.2, is clear that Catiline was a candidate only at the second consular elections, cf. G. SUMNER, The Consular Elections of 66 B.C., Phoenix 19 (1965), 116 B. LOWE Volcatius’ decision have been disputed: it is clear that Catiline was not charged with repetundae until the following year and the mere threat of prosecution did not provide grounds for the quashing of his candidacy3. One need not posit a political motivation for a decision that evidently entailed some legal consideration (Asc. 89) and may have been directed towards securing a re-run of the earlier elections4. According to Cicero the disgruntled Catiline then joined with a young aristocrat, Cn. Calpurnius Piso, in a plot to murder the consuls and massacre the Senate (Asc. 92; Cic., Mur. 81). That Autronius and Sulla were party to the plot seems likely (Sall., Cat. 18; Cic., Sull. 10; Dio Cass. XXXVI 44.3) and their intention was evidently to murder the consuls on the first of Janu- ary 65 BC (Sall., Cat. 18)5. As has long been recognised, the events surrounding the conspiracy are hopelessly unclear and I have little to add to the wealth of scholarly analy- ses though we should be wary of placing too much emphasis on the con- text of Crassus’ rivalry towards Pompey6. Rather I wish to turn our atten- tion to a confused and overlooked footnote to the ‘Conspiracy’, namely p. 226-231; J.T. RAMSEY, Cicero, pro Sulla 68 and Catiline’s Candidacy in 66 B.C., HSPh 86 (1982), p. 121-131. This view has recently been doubted, cf. F.X. RYAN, The Consular Candidacy of Catiline in 66, MH 52 (1995), p. 45-48. 3 E.G. HARDY, The Catilinarian Conspiracy in its Context: a Re-Study of the Evidence, JRS 7 (1917), p. 157-158, has shown that Sallust (Cat. 18.2) is incorrect in attributing Catiline’s rejection to his impending trial for extortion. E.S. GRUEN, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 24, contends that Volcatius’ decision was a political one reflected in his Pompeian background and Catiline’s association with senators hostile to Pompey: Cn. Calpurnius Piso and Q. Lutatius Catulus. On Volcatius’ Pompeian sympathies, cf. Cic., Fam. I 1.3, I 2.1-2, I 4.1. Hardy’s explanation is coloured by the contention that Catiline was the tool of Cras- sus and Caesar, a connection that has been thrown into doubt by R. SEAGER, art. cit. (n. 1), who stresses Catiline’s Pompeian connections. 4 G. SUMNER, art. cit. (n. 2), p. 229, points to the election of Curio to the tribunate in 51 BC as evidence that no legal grounds existed for the rejection of Catiline’s candidacy. By rejecting Catiline, Volcatius was ensuring the election of the ‘Pompeian’ candidates: Torquatus and Cotta. For the view that Autronius and Sulla were Crassus’ men, cf. L.R. TAYLOR, Party Politics in the Age of Caesar, Berkeley 1949, p. 224 n. 23. This con- nection cannot now be maintained: E.S. GRUEN, art. cit. (n. 1), p. 22. 5 The association of the conspiracy referred to by Asconius with that of Sallust on Jan- uary 1 is uncertain as Asconius implies that it took place a year before the delivery of Cicero’s In Toga Candida at the consular elections in the summer of 64 BC. Cic., Sull. 6, includes L. Vargunteius amongst the conspirators. Vargunteius was one of the Catilinar- ian conspirators in 63 BC, cf. Sall., Cat. 17.3, 28.1, 47.3. That he had connections with Crassus may be confirmed by the appearance of a Vargunteius on the staff of Crassus at Carrhae in 53 BC (Plut., Crass. 28.1-2; Oros. VI 13.3). 6 Suet., Iul. 9, records an anti-Caesarian tradition that implicates Crassus and Caesar in the conspiracy and is echoed by Asconius (83) as being derived from Cicero’s THE IMPERIUM OF CN. CALPURNIUS PISO 117 the dispatch of Catiline’s associate, Cn. Calpurnius Piso to the gover- norship of Hispania Citerior. According to Sallust (Cat. 18.5) the intention of the conspirators was to send Piso to Spain following the assassination of the consuls on January the first. Suetonius (Iul. 9) associates Piso with Caesar in a plot to raise rebellions in Spain and Cisalpine Gaul. That Piso was sent to Spain is confirmed by epigraphic evidence that records his appointment as ‘Quaestor pro pr. ex s. c. provinciam Hispaniam Citeriorem’ (ILS 875), however, it is only in Sallust that we find it associated with the conspir- acy. Suetonius implies that it was distinct from the plot to murder the consuls formulated by Crassus, Caesar, Autronius and Sulla; so too Asco- nius (92) who affirms that Piso was ‘in Hispaniam missus a senatu’ and not at the behest of the conspirators7. As it was, the conspiracy of January the first came to nothing8. Piso, however, was sent to Spain to take up his governorship. That Piso should be rewarded for his part in the conspiracy by the grant of ProPraetorian posthumous De consiliis suis, cf. P.A. BRUNT, Three Passages from Asconius, CR 7 (1957), p. 193-195. The earlier view that Catiline acted as agent for Crassus and Caesar against Pompeian interests is found in E.T. SALMON, Catiline, Crassus and Caesar, AJPh 56 (1935), p. 302-316; E.G. HARDY, art. cit.(n. 3). A more moderate version is found in A.M. WARD, Cicero’s Fight against Crassus and Caesar in 65 and 63 B.C., Historia 21 (1972), p. 244-258, who although adducing their electoral support for Catiline does not associate them with the Conspiracy. On the earlier literature, cf. H. FRISCH, The First Catilinarian Conspiracy: a Study in Historical Conjecture, C&M 9 (1948), p. 10-36. This view has been substantially refuted and now receives little currency: cf. E.S. GRUEN, art. cit. (n. 1); R. SYME, Sallust, Berkeley 1964, p. 88-102; C.E. STEVENS, The ‘Plotting’ of B.C. 66/65, Latomus 22 (1963), p. 412-427. R. SEAGER, art. cit. (n. 1), has shown con- nections between Catiline and Pompey and there seems little need to allude to Pompeian and anti-Pompeian agendas in an affair that better evidences the complexities of political alliances and the political rivalries of the nobiles. Crassus’ ties to the Senatorial aristoc- racy have been shown by E.J. PARRISH, Crassus’ New Friends and Pompey’s Return, Phoenix 27 (1973), p. 357-380. 7 Dio’s account (XXXVI 44.3) of Piso’s appointment follows that of Suetonius and dis- sociates it from the earlier conspiracy. 8 Asconius’ identification of Catiline and Piso with the magni homines Cicero said were breaking up the trial of Manilius (66) serves only to add to the confusion. The claim that the alleged conspiracy of 66/65 BC was, in fact, associated with the political context of the trial of Manilius has been taken up by a variety of scholars, cf. E.J.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 295 Emanuela Borgia (Rome) CILICIA and the ROMAN EMPIRE
    EMANUELA BORGIA, CILICIA AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE STUDIA EUROPAEA GNESNENSIA 16/2017 ISSN 2082-5951 DOI 10.14746/seg.2017.16.15 Emanuela Borgia (Rome) CILICIA AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE: REFLECTIONS ON PROVINCIA CILICIA AND ITS ROMANISATION Abstract This paper aims at the study of the Roman province of Cilicia, whose formation process was quite long (from the 1st century BC to 72 AD) and complicated by various events. Firstly, it will focus on a more precise determination of the geographic limits of the region, which are not clear and quite ambiguous in the ancient sources. Secondly, the author will thoroughly analyze the formation of the province itself and its progressive Romanization. Finally, political organization of Cilicia within the Roman empire in its different forms throughout time will be taken into account. Key words Cilicia, provincia Cilicia, Roman empire, Romanization, client kings 295 STUDIA EUROPAEA GNESNENSIA 16/2017 · ROME AND THE PROVINCES Quos timuit superat, quos superavit amat (Rut. Nam., De Reditu suo, I, 72) This paper attempts a systematic approach to the study of the Roman province of Cilicia, whose formation process was quite long and characterized by a complicated sequence of historical and political events. The main question is formulated drawing on – though in a different geographic context – the words of G. Alföldy1: can we consider Cilicia a „typical” province of the Roman empire and how can we determine the peculiarities of this province? Moreover, always recalling a point emphasized by G. Alföldy, we have to take into account that, in order to understand the characteristics of a province, it is fundamental to appreciate its level of Romanization and its importance within the empire from the economic, political, military and cultural points of view2.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cultural Creation of Fulvia Flacca Bambula
    University of Louisville ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository Electronic Theses and Dissertations 5-2017 The cultural creation of Fulvia Flacca Bambula. Erin Leigh Wotring University of Louisville Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd Part of the European History Commons, History of Gender Commons, Intellectual History Commons, Political History Commons, Social History Commons, and the Women's History Commons Recommended Citation Wotring, Erin Leigh, "The cultural creation of Fulvia Flacca Bambula." (2017). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 2691. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/2691 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has retained all other copyrights. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CULTURAL CREATION OF FULVIA FLACCA BAMBULA By Erin Leigh Wotring A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Louisville In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Arts in History Department of History University of Louisville Louisville, KY May, 2017 Copyright 2017 by Erin Leigh Wotring All rights reserved THE CULTURAL CREATION OF FULVIA FLACCA BAMBULA By Erin Leigh Wotring A Thesis Approved on April 14, 2017 by the following Thesis Committee: Dr. Jennifer Westerfeld, Director Dr. Blake Beattie Dr. Carmen Hardin ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Backgrounds and Beginnings Early Republic: from Rome to Roman Italy
    HIS 354 Ruzicka The Roman Republic MHRA 2123 10-11 MWF 334-5488 [email protected] For many people “Rome” conjures up images of a vast empire and a series of autocratic and often deranged emperors. That is only part of the story of Roman history. An equally long and equally fascinating phase—that of the Roman Republic—preceded the age of emperors. It was in fact during this phase of Roman history that Rome became a big city, that the Romans took control of the Mediterranean world, and that Julius Caesar (not an emperor) lived. This course surveys this “republican” period of Roman history from the origins of Rome to the assassination of Julius Caesar--a period of more than seven centuries. The three major themes of the course are: 1) the development of Rome’s distinctive political institutions and practices, 2) the rise of Rome to rule over the entire Mediterranean world and 3) the changes wrought upon Roman society by Roman success. We will first examine the origins of Rome, the evolution of the Roman constitution, and the acquisition of Roman dominion over Italy (the Early Republic). Then, we will follow the story of Rome's rise to world power (the Middle Republic). Finally, we will trace the crises of Republican institutions as a result of the internal pressures generated by Roman responsibility for the Mediterranean world (the Late Republic). In a nutshell, we will be examining the rise and fall of the Roman Republic—a 500-year long story. There will be three examinations, each counting 25% of the final grade, and 3 papers (topics at end of syllabus), counting altogether 25% of the final grade.
    [Show full text]
  • Horace - Poems
    Classic Poetry Series Horace - poems - Publication Date: 2012 Publisher: Poemhunter.com - The World's Poetry Archive Horace(8 December 65 BC – 27 November 8 BC) Quintus Horatius Flaccus, known in the English-speaking world as Horace, was the leading Roman lyric poet during the time of Augustus. The rhetorician Quintillian regarded his Odes as almost the only Latin lyrics worth reading, justifying his estimate with the words: "He can be lofty sometimes, yet he is also full of charm and grace, versatile in his figures, and felicitously daring in his choice of words." Horace also crafted elegant hexameter verses (Sermones and Epistles) and scurrilous iambic poetry (Epodes). The hexameters are playful and yet serious works, leading the ancient satirist Persius to comment: "as his friend laughs, Horace slyly puts his finger on his every fault; once let in, he plays about the heartstrings". Some of his iambic poetry, however, can seem wantonly repulsive to modern audiences. His career coincided with Rome's momentous change from Republic to Empire. An officer in the republican army that was crushed at the Battle of Philippi in 42 BC, he was befriended by Octavian's right-hand man in civil affairs, Maecenas, and became something of a spokesman for the new regime. For some commentators, his association with the regime was a delicate balance in which he maintained a strong measure of independence (he was "a master of the graceful sidestep") but for others he was, in < a href="http://www.poemhunter.com/john-henry-dryden/">John Dryden's</a> phrase, "a well-mannered court slave".
    [Show full text]
  • The Bona Dea Scandal, P. Clodius and Clodia
    DANGEROUS LIAISONS : THE WOMEN BEHIND THE BONA DEA SCANDAL OF 62 BC. IMPORTANT NOTE TO THE FOLLOWING PAPER: Sall. Cat. 15 even as youth Cataline had many shameful intrigues, with a vestal virgin, and other affairs equally unlawful and impious. Sources in MRR 2.114. Fabia the Vestal Virgin, sister of Terentia, was accused of incest with Cataline by Clodius in 73 BC, defended by Lutatius Catulus. Imagine 24-7 news networks during the Late Roman Republic exploiting the following events: BREAKING NEWS Pompey the Great has divorced his wife Mucia when he returned from the East in 62 BC; rumor had it she was having an affair with Julius Caesar. BREAKING NEWS Caesar has divorced Pompeia (no relation to Pompey1) following the scandal of the Bona Dea sacrilege. Pompeia was rumored to have had an affair with P. Clodius, who disguised himself as a woman to visit her during the most sacred rites of the Great Goddess.2 These transpired at Caesar’s house, where Caesar’s own mother and sister apprehended Clodius in their midst. According to our source (Suet. Iul. 74.2), “When summoned as a witness 1 against Clodius, Caesar declared that he had no evidence, although both his mother Aurelia and his sister Julia had given the same jurors a faithful account of the whole affair. On being asked why it was then that he had divorced his wife, he replied, ‘Because I maintain that the members of my family should be free from suspicion as well as from accusation.’” BREAKING NEWS As Clodius’ trial for sacrilege approached, rumor has it that Clodius’ sister, Clodia, has made sexual advances toward M.
    [Show full text]
  • Catiline I I 1 1
    't $ I a i , 2 I i t : ¡ i t : Catiline i I 1 1 ¡ ! '1.. Barbara Levick i a t , a I : t i : : ? : : : : I l ì 2Ð /a BLOOMSBURY LONDON ¡ NEW DELHI T NEW YORK . SYDNEY the east 4 in which m for all Catiline's'First Conspiracy', 66-64 :ing were Rome to t 47 wlth lk a lover ne, along . their bar 5e proved The threatened outbreak of violence , 66-65 Beyond the underþing conditions, blame for the explosive state of Rome and Italy in the 60s lies at the door of senatorial politicians, as jealous as a century before of any individual who might win the credit of relieving the problems of any group, such as the indebted, and the wealthy equestrians who feared loss of capital and profit; while the mass of people at Rome would have felt their usual reluc- tance to share the privileges of full Roman citizenship with Caesar's Transpadanes. In the city itself violence, unrest, and talk of revolution were endemic. Politicians and historians seized on hot contemporary rumours and developed them for their own purposes. In particular, one series of episodes has been worked up ínto what has become known as the'first Catilinarian conspiracyi We have seen Catiline, despite a vulnerable reputation, pursuing a conventional career, but in 66-65, three years before he left Rome and joined forces with the insurrection in Etruria, he was already involved in another plot to assassinate consuls and take power. So it was alleged. As we have seen, the consuls elected for 65, P.
    [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]
  • Caesar and the Pirates: Or How to Make (And Break) an Ancient Life’, Greece and Rome, 57(2), Pp
    Georgetown University Institutional Repository http://www.library.georgetown.edu/digitalgeorgetown The author made this article openly available online. Please tell us how this access affects you. Your story matters. OSGOOD, J. (2010) ‘Caesar and The Pirates: or How to Make (and Break) an Ancient Life’, Greece and Rome, 57(2), pp. 319–336. doi: 10.1017/S0017383510000057 Collection Permanent Link: http://hdl.handle.net/10822/555438 © 2010 The Classical Association This material is made available online with the permission of the author, and in accordance with publisher policies. No further reproduction or distribution of this copy is permitted by electronic transmission or any other means. Greece & Rome, Vol. 57, No. 2, © The Classical Association, 2010. All rights reserved doi:10.1017/S0017383510000057 CAESAR AND THE PIRATES CAESAR AND THE PIRATES: OR HOW TO MAKE (AND BREAK) AN ANCIENT LIFE* Introduction It is hard for biographers, ancient and modern alike, to resist the story of the young Julius Caesar’s kidnapping by a band of pirates. Suetonius and Plutarch both include full versions of the tale, with specifi c details (Suet. Iul. 4; Plut. Vit. Caes. 1.4–2). Suetonius, for instance, writes that the kidnapping took place near the island of Pharmacusa (just off the coast of Asia Minor), while Plutarch, noting that too, also specifi es that the ransom that freed Caesar came from the (nearby) city of Miletus. And while Suetonius writes that Caesar, after his release, launched a fl eet, pursued the pirates, and punished them, Plutarch includes another phase in the story: having taken command of a fl eet and set sail (again, from Miletus), Plutarch’s Caesar captured nearly all the pirates but, instead of killing them right away, ‘he himself went to Iuncus, the governor of Asia, on the grounds that it belonged to him, as governor of the province, to punish the captives’.
    [Show full text]
  • Calendar of Roman Events
    Introduction Steve Worboys and I began this calendar in 1980 or 1981 when we discovered that the exact dates of many events survive from Roman antiquity, the most famous being the ides of March murder of Caesar. Flipping through a few books on Roman history revealed a handful of dates, and we believed that to fill every day of the year would certainly be impossible. From 1981 until 1989 I kept the calendar, adding dates as I ran across them. In 1989 I typed the list into the computer and we began again to plunder books and journals for dates, this time recording sources. Since then I have worked and reworked the Calendar, revising old entries and adding many, many more. The Roman Calendar The calendar was reformed twice, once by Caesar in 46 BC and later by Augustus in 8 BC. Each of these reforms is described in A. K. Michels’ book The Calendar of the Roman Republic. In an ordinary pre-Julian year, the number of days in each month was as follows: 29 January 31 May 29 September 28 February 29 June 31 October 31 March 31 Quintilis (July) 29 November 29 April 29 Sextilis (August) 29 December. The Romans did not number the days of the months consecutively. They reckoned backwards from three fixed points: The kalends, the nones, and the ides. The kalends is the first day of the month. For months with 31 days the nones fall on the 7th and the ides the 15th. For other months the nones fall on the 5th and the ides on the 13th.
    [Show full text]
  • A Fork in the Road: the Catilinarian Conspiracy's Impact
    A Fork in the Road: The Catilinarian Conspiracy‘s Impact on Cicero‘s relationships with Pompey, Crassus` and Caesar Jeffrey Larson History 499: Senior Thesis June 13, 2011 © Jeffrey Larson, 2011 1 But concerning friendship, all, to a man, think the same thing: those who have devoted themselves to public life; those who find their joy in science and philosophy; those who manage their own business free from public cares; and, finally, those who are wholly given up to sensual pleasures — all believe that without friendship life is no life at all. .1 The late Roman Republic was filled with crucial events which shaped not only the political environment of the Republic, but also altered the personal and political relationships of the individuals within that Republic. Four of the most powerful, and most discussed, characters of this time are Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BC – 43 BC), Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus (106 BC – 48 BC), Marcus Licinius Crassus (c. 115 BC – 53 BC), and Gaius Julius Caesar (c. 100 BC – 44 BC). These men often crossed paths and some even had close friendships with each other. Other than Pompeius, better known as Pompey, all the aforementioned individuals were involved, or reportedly involved, in one event which had profound effects on the personal and political relationships of all four individuals. This event is known as the Catilinarian Conspiracy of 63 BC. The Catilinarian Conspiracy was a pivotal episode in the politics of the Late Roman Republic that damaged both the political and personal relationships of Cicero, Pompey, Crassus, and Caesar. Politics in the Roman Republic was dominated by a small number of members of the senatorial class.
    [Show full text]
  • Cicero, Pro Lege Manilia De Imperio Cn. Pompei (66 BC)
    LAT 490 Senior Studies in Latin: Select Topics & LAT 691: Topics in Latin Language Cicero, Pro lege Manilia de imperio Cn. Pompei (66 BC) Course Outline (19 Jan. 2013) icero’s speech in support of the Manilian Law (66 BC) was his first public involvement with legislative and constitutional matters. He advocated a bill put forward by C. Manilius to give Pompey the highest C command over all provinces of Asia Minor and thus to empower him in a unique way to end the protracted (third) war against Mithridates (73-63 BC). This speech provides fresh insights into the dynamics and mechanisms of the ‘last generation’ of the Roman Republic, the conflicts caused by her imperial ambitions, and a rhetoric that foreshadowed the path towards monarchy in the not-too-far future. Instructor Professor Altay Coşkun ML 228, ext. 38903 [email protected] Office hours: W 10:00-12:00, and on appointment Term/Time/Location Winter 2013 / M 9:30-12:30 / Room: AL 209 Required Texts A Latin text, explanatory notes, and some scholarly readings will be made available prior to the classes Course Requirements Four in-class tests three of which are counted at 20% each & Workload for LAT 490 One special assignment worth 20% Active participation 20% Average workload: 5 hrs. outside classroom Course Requirements Four in-class tests three of which are counted at 16% each & Workload for LAT 691 Three special assignments worth 16% each Active participation worth 20% Average workload: 9 hrs. outside classroom Learning Outcomes and Course Objectives: Through an in-depth study of the Maniliana, the students will learn about the biographies of top players of the Late Republic, especially Cicero and Pompey, and the political culture and constitutional practice.
    [Show full text]