Daddy, where were you when Mr Gracchus died?
Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:45 pm
Salvete omnes,
I was reading Appian's "Civil Wars" today, and Appian states that "Cornelius Scipio" (I assumed Scipio Aemilianus) was one of the prime movers in the action against Tiberius Gracchus. However, given that the elections for the Tribune would have taken place in the middle of the year, and hence the middle of 133 BCE, surely Scipio Aemilianus would have still been in Spain at this point?
This thought got me thinking even further. (It's a downward spiral ) What were the great movers of later years doing during the troubles surrounding Tiberius Gracchus? For instance, what was the young Marius up to? He would have been in his early twenties I believe, and if my dating is correct he should have been in Spain also. Appian mentions the Tribunes Mummius, Rubrius and Octavius. The next Mummius that I can recall is one of the yes-men appearing in the Caesar-Pompeius rivalry, and I've never heard of a Rubrius before. Octavius, of course, appears many times over the history of Rome. However, it's difficult to work out just what the men who would be behind the events of later decades were doing at the time of the death of Tiberius Gracchus. Where are the Caecilii Metelli? At this point, admittedly, their influence was not it was to be later. Appian does mention the Pontifex Maximus, Cornelius Scipio Nasica (Was his praenomen Publius? Appian doesn't say) being one of those rallying support against Tiberius Gracchus. A Scipio Nasica does appear later on, but by that point the influence of the Scipiones was much diminished. And what of Marcus Aemilius Scaurus? He would have been entering the Senate in that year, if the date that I heard for his birth (163 BCE) is correct. Looking at his later career, I assume he would have supported the Senatorial faction led by Scipio Nasica and (apparently) the absent Aemilianus. And where was Catulus Caesar? The Fabii? The Postumii?
Of course, the reason none of the prime movers of later years are mentioned is because they were mostly insignificant at the time of the Gracchi. However, it really seems frustrating that it's so difficult to detect the allegiances and actions of many of the great politicians in their earlier years.
Any thoughts on this?
Bene valete,
Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.
I was reading Appian's "Civil Wars" today, and Appian states that "Cornelius Scipio" (I assumed Scipio Aemilianus) was one of the prime movers in the action against Tiberius Gracchus. However, given that the elections for the Tribune would have taken place in the middle of the year, and hence the middle of 133 BCE, surely Scipio Aemilianus would have still been in Spain at this point?
This thought got me thinking even further. (It's a downward spiral ) What were the great movers of later years doing during the troubles surrounding Tiberius Gracchus? For instance, what was the young Marius up to? He would have been in his early twenties I believe, and if my dating is correct he should have been in Spain also. Appian mentions the Tribunes Mummius, Rubrius and Octavius. The next Mummius that I can recall is one of the yes-men appearing in the Caesar-Pompeius rivalry, and I've never heard of a Rubrius before. Octavius, of course, appears many times over the history of Rome. However, it's difficult to work out just what the men who would be behind the events of later decades were doing at the time of the death of Tiberius Gracchus. Where are the Caecilii Metelli? At this point, admittedly, their influence was not it was to be later. Appian does mention the Pontifex Maximus, Cornelius Scipio Nasica (Was his praenomen Publius? Appian doesn't say) being one of those rallying support against Tiberius Gracchus. A Scipio Nasica does appear later on, but by that point the influence of the Scipiones was much diminished. And what of Marcus Aemilius Scaurus? He would have been entering the Senate in that year, if the date that I heard for his birth (163 BCE) is correct. Looking at his later career, I assume he would have supported the Senatorial faction led by Scipio Nasica and (apparently) the absent Aemilianus. And where was Catulus Caesar? The Fabii? The Postumii?
Of course, the reason none of the prime movers of later years are mentioned is because they were mostly insignificant at the time of the Gracchi. However, it really seems frustrating that it's so difficult to detect the allegiances and actions of many of the great politicians in their earlier years.
Any thoughts on this?
Bene valete,
Marcus Scribonius Curio Britannicus.