Late Roman Republic

Oratory and Roman Historiography in Nicolas Caussin’s Eloquentiae Sacrae et Humanae Parallela (1619) - This paper focusses on the Jesuit Nicholas Caussin’s ‘Eloquentiae Sacrae et Humanae Parallela’ (1619), with a particular analysis of some chapters of ‘De veteri eloquentia’ Book I. In this context we find a gallery of the most illustrious Greek and Roman orators which offers the opportunity to evaluate the author’s method of selecting, classifying and understanding the ancient texts with a marked attention to historiography. In addition to the use of a chronological order, an acknowledgment of Cicero’s authority and stylistic supremacy along with citations from his ‘Brutus’, Caussin’s section regarding Roman orators shows his ability to understand the role of eloquence in the overall political context of ancient Rome, as well as his interest in the figure and works of the historian Sallust. Focalizing on this latter aspect, the second part of the paper underlines how by including the text of the contio attributed by Sallust to the general Gaius Marius, in Book XIII of his ‘Eloquentiae Sacrae et Humanae Parallela’ Caussin added glosses not limited to the rhetorical aspects of the speech. In particular we see how his point of view as a Jesuit contributes to his vision of the general Marius, as a virtuous citizen also embodying values relating to a wisdom of Senecan ascendancy and to a Christian perspective. In this sense, Caussin’s glosses on the ‘contio’ attributed by Sallust to Gaius Marius appear quite different from those composed a half century earlier by Remigio Nannini, who included the same text in his ‘Orationi militari’ highlighting its social-political significance.

The paper examines the upsurge of piracy in the last century of the Roman Republic, to underline its impact on politics. Analysing the testimonials about the period after 105 BC, we can appreciate that as well as interfering in the wars against Mithridates, the fight against the pirates who were also infesting the western Mediterranean, gained a meaningful role in the political agenda. Some prominent figures on the public scene engaged by the institutions to solve the problem, exploited it to gain extraordinary powers that would take on a different meaning depending on the circumstances and their personalities, as shown by Pompey’s command of 67 BC. He took advantage of his skill to dissimulate his ambitions and the auctoritas he enjoyed, to obtain a position that, despite modern historiography’s difficulty with establishing its juridical limits, was the first step in his quest to rise to absolute power. This continued not only the following year with the new command that the Lex Manilia granted him, but also in the next decade when Pompey consolidated his position, taking advantage of the financial difficulties linked to the shortage of food supplies, not unlike those caused previously by the pirates’ incursions. All of this is witnessed on the one hand by Cicero, whose opinion of this figure became gradually more negative in the period from 66-49 BC, on the other by Imperial Age historiography. Centuries afterwards the latter was able to perceive and underline more and more explicitly the subversive novelty of the extraordinary command given to Pompey to eradicate piracy, bringing out its major role in the process leading to the decline of the Republican institutions and the creation of the Principality.

The references to the cult of Vesta included in numerous excerpts of Seneca the Elder’s collection of Controversiae offer a proof of the technical competence of declaimers in recalling the conditions prescribed by pontifical law for being admitted and kept in this priesthood, of which we are informed by the antiquarian tradition. Furthermore, these passages, which also show the importance recognized from an ethical viewpoint to values such as castitas and pudicitia in the time of Augustus and Tiberius, can be interpreted in light of some special episodes and dispositions stated by the historiographical tradition which reveal their interest in promoting and consolidating the cult of the Goddess Vesta protector of Rome’s Empire. Beyond the scholastic practice, the same interest is equally shared in the literary sphere by Seneca the Elder, as we can understand from the quotations within his work of excerpts from Controversiae dealing with Vestals

Analysis of some sections of Remigio Nannini's anthologies of historiographical speeches (Venice, Giolito 1557; 1560; 1561), with special reference to the orations taken from Cassius Dio’s ‘Roman History’, in order to show the tendency of the Dominican Compiler to revitalize their meaning and to interpret their content in the light of the political context of late Cinquecento Florence.

""""“Barbatuli iuvenes”. Political Activity of Young Roman Aristocrats during the so-called First Triumvirate. 

On the turn of the 60’s  B.C. we could notice a political activity of young men in their twenties who were often termed in Cicero’s speeches and letters as barbatuli iuvenes. Such an activity was facilitated due to the fact that a relative stability of the political system of the Republic was threatened by Cn. Pompeius Magnus, C. Iulius Caesar and M. Licinius Crassus.
The first recorded action carried out by young aristocrats was the trial of P. Claudius Pulcher (aka Clodius) in 62 B.C. Barbatuli iuvenes were led by C. Scribonius Curio, sometimes called princeps iuventutis. In the first half of the 50’s B.C. during the first triumvirate of Pompey, Crassus and Caesar, became the Opposition aiming at the primacy in the state of Pompey and Caesar.
Contemporary researchers use the term barbatuli iuvenes to refer to a large circle of the sons of meritorious nobles. For example, besides the earlier-mentioned Curio, who was the son of C. Scribonius Curio (cos. 76), they also mention other people belonging to barbatuli iuvenes, namely a triumvir-to-be, M. Antonius, Dec. Iunius Brutus Albinus, little-known C. Megabocchus and perhaps M. Caelius Rufus and C. Licinius Macer Calvus.
""""

The propaganda about Ceres has unique characteristics. It is an Italic goddess associated from the beginning with the plebeian cause, so since its origins, its propaganda was linked to this faction and highly politicized. For this reason, it is difficult to discern its role in political events described by ancient historiography, but it is easier to analyze her role in the late-Republican coin where her image was used by triumviri monetales as faction propaganda or personal publicity. Ceres remained the goddess of agriculture and the annnona, at the same time was the goddess of the plebs for excellence and thus played an important symbolic role in the political struggle of the last period of the Republic.

The genealogy of the Postumii Albini from the second half of the second century BCE onwards is uncertain and debated. This article attempts a new discussion of the evidence. Its main contention is that A. Postumius Albinus, cos. 99, should be distinguished from the homonymous legate, brother of Sp. Postumius Albinus, cos. 110; that the two moneyers A. Postumii Albini were, in all likelihood, not directly related to each other and were probably sons of the last two consuls of the family; and, as a consequence, that at least two lines of descent between the second and the first century BCE can be discerned. On the basis of these results, a new stemma of the ancient patrician family of the Albini is put forward.

The issue of audience targeting is crucial in studies of contemporary propaganda. Meanwhile, it is usually ignored in analysis of Roman propaganda despite the fact that studies of ancient rhetoric clearly shows that speakers were well aware that they must use a different language when performing in front of different audiences. The primary aim of this paper is to consider the possibility of targeting propaganda messages encoded on coins struck by the Pompeians (RRC 444, RRC 445/1-3) during the war with Caesar. The analysis of the imagery placed on these coins may indicate that different types were in the first instance intended for the inhabitants of Epirus and Greece (RRC 444, RRC 445/2), Sicily (RRC 445/1) and West Asia Minor (RRC 445/3). Considering the fact that those were the most important areas of recruitment for the Pompeians, it is possible that by placing images that referred to them they tried to influence locals also in this way.

The ancient sources offer clear and unambiguous evidence that Sulla’s civil war victory at the battle of the Colline Gate was followed first by a wave of indiscriminate urban violence and then by the publication of the first proscription lists. Hinard sanitises the evidence and denies that there was a wave of violence prior to the genesis of the proscriptions. A key source is Orosius, whose testimony is rejected on the grounds that he describes bounty hunters bringing chaos to the streets of Rome before the publication of the first proscription list. Orosius refers to percussores, and Hinard claims that this was a technical term for the freelance killers who responded to the proclamation of an official bounty on the heads of the proscribed. My aim in this article is to show that this definition is without basis. It is also my intention to stress that the violence of Sulla’s victory was not exclusively official or state-sponsored.

"Una volta finita la battaglia, allora sì che avresti potuto comprendere con lo sguardo quanto grandi fossero state l’audacia e la forza d’animo nell’esercito di Catilina. Infatti, quasi la stessa posizione che ognuno, da vivo, aveva assunto nello schieramento, anche ora, da morto, la ricopriva con il proprio corpo; e quei pochi, al centro, che la coorte pretoria aveva allontanato, erano caduti poco più in là, e tutti con ferite frontali; Catilina, invece, fu trovato lontano dai suoi, in mezzo ai cadaveri dei nemici, che ancora rantolava, serbando però sul volto la fierezza avuta in vita. Infine, in  tutto quello che era stato il suo esercito, nessun concittadino libero fu catturato, né in battaglia né in fuga: tanto poco tutti avevano risparmiato, alla stessa maniera, la vita propria e quella dei nemici. Né l’esercito del popolo romano aveva ottenuto una vittoria lieta o poco cruenta. I più valorosi, infatti, erano caduti in battaglia o ne erano usciti con gravi ferite; molti, spintisi fuori dall’accampamento per curiosità o brama di saccheggio, rivoltando i cadaveri dei nemici, trovavano chi un amico, chi un ospite, chi un parente; ci fu anche chi trovò nemici personali. Così, per tutto l’esercito, si agitavano la gioia, la tristezza, il lutto e l’allegria." (Sallustio, La congiura di Catilina, 61)

Così lo storico Gaio Sallustio Crispo chiude la narrazione della congiura di Lucio Sergio Catilina; il patrizio, che non era riuscito a sovvertire il governo di Roma, trovò infatti la morte alla testa della sua armata di ribelli, annientata dall’esercito regolare nello scontro all’ultimo sangue combattuto agli inizi del 62 a.C. presso Pistoia.
La vicenda della congiura, tra le più menzionate dell’intera storia antica, ci è stata tramandata principalmente dalla narrazione di Sallustio e dalle orazioni di Marco Tullio Cicerone, il console che la combatté con molta – e, per alcuni, troppa – determinazione. Entrambi gli autori, tratteggiandone il protagonista come uomo depravato e sanguinario, hanno influenzato l’intera tradizione. La critica storica, quindi, persino nei relativamente recenti tentativi di ‘rivalutazione’, si trova a fare i conti con un impianto che nasce con impostazione ‘manichea’.
Anche per questo motivo, gli ingredienti in grado di attirare l’attenzione non sono mai mancati. Un aristocratico, la cui malvagità resta dipinta in immortali ritratti letterari, si era rivolto alla parte più scontenta del popolo per tramare nell’ombra la rovina della maggiore repubblica mai conosciuta. Il tutto, quasi non bastasse, racchiuso in una cornice di orge, scandali e tradimenti, perpetrati da personaggi dediti a vizi di ogni genere. E, ancora, la repressione ciceroniana, avallata dal senato ma irrituale, resa possibile dalla sospensione delle garanzie ‘costituzionali’ del cittadino, difese – nel più noto dibattito senatorio di cui siamo a conoscenza – dal ‘popolare’ Gaio Giulio Cesare e invece sminuite dall’‘ottimate’ Marco Porcio Catone, il futuro ‘Uticense’, eroe repubblicano di ogni tempo.
Pare superfluo accennare alla varietà di letture e di passioni che tale materia ha sollevato. A livello retorico, dare del ‘Catilina’ agli avversari politici divenne da subito, già sulle labbra di Cicerone, un’offesa. Ma il nostro impersonò anche, in virtù della propria vicenda, una figura tragica, e in quanto tale fonte d’ispirazione per artisti e pensatori. La congiura stessa, intesa come tentativo di rovesciare la repubblica, è stata poi fertile terreno d’indagine politica, storiografica e, in tempi più recenti, economica e sociologica.
Chi fu Catilina? Come giunse a progettare e pianificare la sovversione? Quali furono i suoi obiettivi e le sue forze? Quali invece quelli di Cicerone, il grande ed eloquente avversario? Quale la posizione di Cesare? Come Roma e, in seguito, la cultura occidentale, hanno rielaborato l’inquietante vicenda?
A ognuna di queste domande il presente volume proverà a suggerire possibili risposte. Lo farà ripercorrendo la vita di Catilina – assai misteriosa sino alla ‘scoperta’ della congiura –, e ricostruendo le principali direttrici della successiva ‘fortuna’ del personaggio.

Many of the wars of the Late Republic were largely civil conflicts. There was, therefore, a tension between the traditional expectation that triumphs should be celebrated for victories over foreign enemies and the need of the great commanders to give full expression to their prestige and charisma, and to legitimize their power.Triumphs in the Age of Civil War rethinks the nature and the character of the phenomenon of civil war during the Late Republic. At the same time it focuses on a key feature of the Roman socio-political order: the triumph, and argues that a commander could in practice expect to triumph after a civil war victory if it could also be represented as being over a foreign enemy, even if the principal opponent was clearly Roman. Significantly, the civil aspect of the war did not have to be denied.Carsten Hjort Lange provides the first study to consider the Roman triumph during the age of civil war, and argues that the idea of civil war as "normal" reflects the way civil war permeated the politics and society of the Late Roman Republic. -


Reviews

“The first comprehensive monograph on the Roman triumph in the momentous civil war era, this insightful and thought-provoking study is as much a study of a well-known but poorly understood aspect of late republican Roman political life as an alternative viewpoint on the historic transition from Republic to Empire. This original and readily accessible book much advances our understanding of one of the Roman aristocracy's foremost rituals in a transformative period and is bound to stimulate further debate and reflection.” –  Frederik J. Vervaet, Associate Professor of Ancient History, The University of Melbourne, Australia

“Carsten Hjort Lange's book is the first to tell the story of what happened to the triumph – Rome's highest military honor – in a long period of civil war. In doing so, he offers new answers to the urgent question of how societies end civil war and come back together as one. There is bold and confident argument throughout, culminating in a superb discussion of the triumph's development under the emperor Augustus and its foundational role in the establishment of imperial government.” –  Josiah Osgood, Professor of Classics, Georgetown University, USA

See more at: http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/triumphs-in-the-age-of-civil-war-9781474267847/#sthash.zJIWwL0U.dpuf

SEE PROMOTIONAL CODE!

Virtus and Fortuna are the driving forces of history in Florus' History, which is entirely structured and dedicated to the sequence of wars and battles. The descriptions of battles, based on these principles, form a basic narrative in Florus, and were therefore rightly studied systematically. However, besides specific narrative techniques that are used to construct these battle narratives, I argue in the following that one can also observe developments in these battle narratives throughout Florus' work. As I shall show, parallel to his leitmotif of a growing up of the populus Romanus in four steps that eventually ends in his work with the transition from the third to the fourth stage under Octavian/Augustus, the battle descriptions also change, particularly during and after the civil war period.

At a pivotal moment early in his revolt against Rome, Quintus Sertorius, a key figure in Sallust's fragmentary Histories, is tempted by the opportunity to sail away to the " Isles of the Blessed. " Sallust's few fragments on these islands, when compared to Plutarch's more detailed description, reveal how the Roman historian, by emphasizing their place in the literary tradition rather than in the geography of the known world, constructs a commentary on two " histories " : Sertorius' impossible position in his revolt against Rome, and the tragic political conditions of his own day. The echoes of Sertorius' illusory escape to a utopia in Horace's Epode 16, in stark contrast to Plutarch's rationalizing account, help bring to light both of these histories in Sallust's brief account of this episode. uintus Sertorius has long been a polarizing figure of Roman history, as is demonstrated by the historiographical vicissitudes of his reputation over the centuries. At one extreme stands Theodor Mommsen, who hailed him as one of the greatest, if not the greatest man Rome had produced up to his time, one who in more fortunate circumstances could have become the savior (Regenerator) of his country; Helmut Berve, at the other extreme, declared Sertorius a traitor, a hostis populi Romani, aligned with Rome's other great enemy of the period, Mithridates. 1 * I would like to thank the editor, the anonymous referees and Ben DeSmidt for their valuable criticisms and corrections; a special debt of gratitude is owed to John T. Ramsey, whose acumen and learning greatly improved the article. I would also like to thank the University of Connecticut Humanities Institute for a generous fellowship during which this article was completed. 1 Mommsen (1904) 3.37: " So endigte einer der größten, wo nicht der größte Mann, den Rom bisher hervorgebracht, ein Mann, der unter glücklicheren Umständen vielleicht der Regenerator

Marcus Aemilius Lepidus (cos. 78 B.C.) is deeply reviled in most of our literary evidences. Plutarch of Chaeronea stands out, emphasizing the negative traits, direct inheritance of the Sullan tradition. This article seeks to analyze his version in this regard, in order to reflect on the existing decline in his interpretation.

Beginning with a semantic history of the term negotiator, this essay reconsiders Augustus’s role in the history of Roman citizenship. It restores negotiator as a byword for how Roman officials in the Late Republic understood Romans in the provinces and argues that the term’s connotations, combined with several Late Republican institutions, reveal a vision of these Romans as partaking in Roman imperialism. Several of Augustus’s actions, including the development of a new language for understanding these Romans, promoted a new vision of the place of citizens in the empire, making them subjects of an empire which had previously been theirs.

In 3rd century BC, like a part of the global process of Hellenization of the Roman culture, Hippocratic medicine arrived to Rome. Between year 219 BC, when is attested the first Greek physician in the city, and the 2nd century AD, when Galen of Pergamon developed a doctrine which laid the foundations of western medicine, a succession of medical professionals made possible the progressive importing and assimilation of Greek allopathy in italic soil. In this way, a foreign element turned into a characteristic and representative component of Roman culture. The aim of this paper is to analyze the socio-cultural features that characterized this process of scientific diffusion. To this end, we propose a combined study of literary and epigraphical sources that refers to physicians who made possible this development.

The ancient tradition of Pompey’s celebrating his first triumphs as pro praetore and pro consule nominated by the Senate is contrary to the rule, according to which only high magistrates had ius triumphandi. To resolve this controversy, the author argues the idea that Pompey was elected as a praetor of Sicily for 81 and Hispania Citerior for 76 BC. His praetorium imperium in both provinciae not much differed from that of promagisterial and, perhaps therefore, was described as such by the historians who wrote after the law of Pompey '52 BC, when the Senate had got the ability to provide an imperium for promagistracies.

An examination of the career of Crassus, with particular attention to conflicting evidence in the available sources regarding his early life. The paper is a revision of a paper originally written in the late 1970's. It takes note of the few issues brought to my attention by my tutor at the time, and makes some adjustments based on my own recent review of the sources.

A lo largo de la historia, casi ningún sistema político complejo ha podido escapar a la influencia del poder financiero, la manipulación institucional, la corrupción de los dirigentes, los graves desequilibrios sociales y el bloqueo de las élites a las reformas comunitarias. Durante su existencia, la República romana conoció muchas de esas tentativas y tensiones, siendo la conspiración de Lucio Sergio Catilina, a la que hizo frente Cicerón durante su consulado, la más famosa de ellas. Con este actualizado texto, el lector dispone de un acercamiento didáctico a los desajustes de la sociedad romana que llevaron a Catilina a emprender su aventura. De este modo puede llegar a sus propias conclusiones, no sólo  en relación a este episodio concreto del pasado, sino también a los procesos históricos similares que se extienden hasta nuestros días.

A critical examination of the ancient sources regarding Julius Caesar's opposition to the execution of Catiline's co-conspirators.  Sallust's account is compared to the evidence from Cicero's speech (In Catilinam IV), along with later accounts.
The paper is based on an old 1979 assignment, but with some reference updates and other minor adjustments.

Abstract
This article examines the longstanding rivalry of Rome and Parthia, which began as an unintended consequence of Crassus’ decisive defeat at Carrhae in 53 BCE. It synthesizes the accounts and opinions of numerous Graeco-Roman writers from the Augustan Age to late antiquity in order to help illustrate the new and interconnected post-Carrhae world and its legacy. The rivalry of the Romans and Parthians became a primary focus of their foreign policies and drastically expanded their perceptions of the world in which they interacted. Even after the fall of the Parthians to the rebellious Sassanid Persians in the 220s CE, the Romans continued to find their three-century-long rivalry with the Parthians of interest and relevant to the changing world of late antiquity.