From the Gracchi to Nero: A History of Rome from 133 B.C. to A.D. 68 (59 page)

27 MITHRIDATES. For the kingdom of Pontus and the Mithridatic War see Th. Reinach,
Mithridate Eupator
(1890); M. Rostovtzeff,
CAH
, IX, ch. v.; D. Magie,
Roman Rule in Asia Minor
(1950), chs. 8 and 9. On Roman involvement in Asia Minor, 167–88 B.C., see A. N. Sherwin-White,
JRS
, 1977, 62 ff., and on Rome and Mithridates before 88 and in 85–73 see D. G. Glew,
Athanaeum
, 1977, 380 ff., and
Chiron
, 1981, 109 ff., respectively. [p. 61]

28 SULLA’S PRAETORSHIP. E. Badian (
Athenaeum
, 1959, 379 ff. =
Studies
, 157 ff.) has shown that this fell in 97 (not 93) and that he held a command (against the pirates?) in Cilicia: here he was instructed by the Senate to install Ariobarzanes in Cappadocia (96). This view involves some consequential adjustments in the generally accepted account of Asiatic affairs in the nineties. A. N. Sherwin-White,
C1. Qu.
, 1977, 173 ff., argues that Ariobarzanes was restored by Sulla in 94 and ruled till
c.
91. [p. 62]

29 MITHRIDATES AND THE ITALIANS. So far from helping the Romans, Mithridates is said to have promised help to the Italians in the Social War. A unique gold coin with an Oscan inscription may have been issued in anticipation (or on account?) of such help (see E. A. Sydenham,
CRR
, n. 643); a more common silver coin of the Italians (
op. cit.
, n. 632) depicts a man (Mithridates?) being greeted as he lands from a ship – another anticipatory issue? This may however depict the return of the exiled Marius: M. Crawford,
Num. Chr.
, 1964, 148. On the other hand, an interesting document, a senatorial decree of 78 B.C., records how three Greek ship-captains who helped Rome were rewarded by the title of ‘Friend of Rome’ and other honours because ‘they had stood by in their ships at the outbreak of the Italian War and had rendered valiant and faithful service to our State’ (see Warmington,
ROL
, iv, 444); Riccobono,
FIRA
, p. 35; Sherk,
Rom. Documents Greek East
, 22; trans. Lewis and Reinhold,
Rn. Civ.
, 267 f. The Italian War is either the Social or Sulla’s war of 83–2. [p. 63]

29a GREECE AND ATHENS. On the history of Athens in the time of Mithridates see C. Habicht,
Chiron
, 1976, 127 ff; on the events of 92–87 see E. Badian,
Amer. Journ. Anc. Hist.
, 1976, 105 ff; and on Mithridates’ anti-Roman propaganda in Asia Minor and Greece see E. S. Gaggero,
Contrib. in onore di A. Garzetti
, 89 ff. [p. 64]

30 CHAERONEA. The chief sources for the war in Greece are Plutarch,
Sulla
, 11–21, and Appian,
Mithr.
28–45 and 49–50. Plutarch’s account uses as a primary source the
Memoirs
of Sulla himself. Plutarch was a native of Chaeronea. On the battle see N.G.L. Hammond,
Klio
, 1938, 186 ff. [p. 64]

31 FLACCUS AND SULLA. So Memnon (Jacoby,
FGrH
, 434, F.24). For Sulla’s claim that despatch of Flaccus was a stab in the back, see Plut.
Sulla
, 20, 1. Cf. E. Badian,
JRS
, 1962, 56 =
Studies
, 223 f. That Fimbria had been Flaccus’ quaestor rather than legate see A. W. Lintott,
Historia
, 1971, 696 ff. On the date of their deaths see A. W. Lintott,
Historia
, 1976, 489 ff. [p. 64]

32 SETTLEMENT OF ASIA MINOR. The view of Mommsen and T. Frank, that Sulla deprived the
publicani
of the right to farm the taxes of Asia (based on Cicero,
ad Q. fr.
1. 1. 33) and that it was restored by Pompey (Cic. Verr. 3.6. 12), has been rejected by Rice Holmes,
RR
. I, 395, and P. A. Brunt,
Latomus
, 1956, 17 ff. How a loyal city’s privileges were confirmed and even extended is seen in a letter that Sulla wrote to Stratonicea, in which he quotes the resolution of the Senate taken on this matter in 81 (for a translation of this document,
OGIS
441 and R. K. Sherk,
Roman Documents of the Greek East
, 22, see Lewis and Reinhold,
Rn. Civ.
, 1, 337 f.). See also similar letters from Sulla and Cn.Cornelius Dolabella to Thasos: Sherk, 20,21. Sulla also responded favourably to an appeal from the Guild of Actors of Iona and the Hellespont, the Artists of Dionysus, and renewed their earlier privileges including exemption from public and military service. The favour was later confirmed by the Senate in 81: copies of the SC, together with Sulla’s covering letter, were set up in various towns; that in Cos survives in part (see M. Segre,
Riv. Fil.
, 1938, 253 ff., R. K. Sherk,
Historia
, 1966, 211 ff. and
Documents
, 49; and for a translation Lewis and Reinhold,
Rn. Civ.
, 342). Sulla was greatly interested in the stage and stage-folk, including a friendship with the great actor Roscius: see further S. Garton, ‘Sulla and the Theatre’,
Phoenix
, 1964, 137 ff. [p. 65]

33 THE SAMNITES. E. T. Salmon has shown (
Athenaeum
, 1964, 160 ff.;
Samnium
, 377 ff.) that the Social War did not just merge into the Civil War, but that the Samnites had been at peace during Sulla’s absence from Italy. But they were deliberately excluded from the treaty which Sulla signed with ‘Italic peoples’ in the winter of 83–82 and by driving them into hostility he could transform his personal war into a national crusade against Rome’s old enemy. [p. 66]

34 PRAENESTE. For the topography see R. Gardner,
Journal of Philology
, 1919, pp. 1 ff. The temple of Fortuna there was reconstructed by Sulla. This famous sanctuary, built on the hillside on terraced slopes, is a most imposing monument. Some of the later buildings that covered it were destroyed by bombing during the last war, and the whole complex now displays something of its earlier magnificence. See F. Fasolo and G. Gullini,
Il santuario della Fortuna Primigenia a Palestrina
(1953). On the topography and siege see now R. G. Lewis,
Papers Brit. Sch. Rome
, 1971, 32 ff. [p. 66]

35 POMPEY’S TRIUMPH. The date of its celebration is. uncertain, whether 81, 80 or 79. E. Badian (
Hermes
, 1955, 107 ff.) and R. E. Smith (
Phoenix
, 1960, pp. 1 ff.) are agreed in rejecting 79: the former supports 81, the latter 80. Badian has also emphasized (
For. C1.
, 273 ff.) the seriousness of Pompey’s potential threat to Sulla:
imperator
with six legions in Africa, control of Sicily, a reasonable fleet, possible support from Numidia and Mauretania, connexions in Cisalpine Gaul, the loyalty of Picenum in an Italy that was not yet completely settled; all this, together with Sertorius in the West, may well have led Sulla not to persist too far in opposing Pompey. Smith (
op. cit.
, p. 8) thinks this view exaggerates the threat which Pompey posed to Sulla at this point. [p. 66]

36 SULLA’S COLONIES. These included Arretium, Clusium, Faesulae, Interamnia, Nola, Pompeii, Praeneste. In most cases (except Pompeii) the colonists remained separate from the original inhabitants and the two communities existed side by side. For a list and discussion see E. Gabba,
Athenaeum
, 1951, 270 =
RR, Army
, 67 ff. Cf. also E. T. Salmon,
Roman Colonization
(1969), 129 ff. and P. A. Brunt,
Italian Manpower
(1971), 300 ff. Brunt argues that the pattern of land settlement in Italy was not so radically changed as some believe: confiscated latifundia may still have remained largely in the hands of
latifondisti
, now Sullans in place of Marians, while a large proportion of the Sullan colonists probably failed to make good. [p. 67]

37 SULLA FELIX. On this name see J. P. V. D. Balsdon,
JRS
, 1951, pp. 1 ff. It is disputable whether this name was officially voted to Sulla by the Senate, which by the end of 82 had ordered the erection of an equestrian statue of Sulla inscribed ‘Cornelio Sullae Imperatori Felici’ (Appian,
BC
, 1, 97). Sulla, who as early as 86 had named his twin children Faustus and Fausta, certainly believed in his luck. In Greece he may have used the name Epaphroditus to indicate that he enjoyed Aphrodite’s favour, though Felix may not imply a cult of Venus in Italy:
felicitas
was an essential quality of a successful general (see Cicero,
De imp. Cn. Pomp.
28; 47). Cf. also E. Badian,
Historia
, 1962, 229 = Seager,
Crisis
, 229. Another of the spoils of victory was an augurate. E. Badian (
Arethusa
, 1968, 26 ff.) has shown that Sulla added this honour to his earlier pontificate after victory and thus became one of the select few Romans to become both pontifex and augur. [p. 67]

37a VALERIUS FLACCUS. On Sulla’s letter to the interrex Flaccus (Appian,
BC
, 1, 98) and the genesis of Sulla’s dictatorship see H. Bellen,
Historia
, 1975, 554 ff. [p. 67]

38 CICERO’S DEFENCE OF ROSCIUS. The closing of the proscription lists did not mean the end of all suffering. The name of Sextus Roscius of Ameria, who had been murdered, was later added to the list in order that his property might be confiscated and acquired for a nominal sum by one of Sulla’s agents named Chrysogonus. To avoid possible exposure Chrysogonus’ accomplices charged Roscius’ son with the murder of
his father, thinking that no one would dare defend him through fear of Sulla. Young Cicero, however, boldly and successfully undertook the case, which came before the
quaestio inter sicarios
. In his speech
Pro Sexto Roscio Amerino
, delivered in 80 or possibly 79, he exposed Chrysogonus, but carefully pointed out that Sulla was far too busy to be able to keep an eye on all his agents. It is symptomatic of the disordered times that Roscius’ acquittal secured him his personal safety but not the restoration of his father’s property. See also Gruen,
Rom. Pol.
, 265 ff. [p. 69]

39 SULLA’S NEW SENATORS. One tradition records that they were drawn from the Equites (Appian,
BC
, 1. 100. 5: ‘three hundred of the best Knights’; Livy,
Perioch
. 89, ‘ex equestri ordine’), another that they were ‘gregarii milites’ (Sall.
Cat
. 37. 6) or ‘ordinary men’ (Dionysius, 5. 77. 5). H. Hill,
C1. Qu.
, 1932, 170 ff., argued for the former tradition in the narrow sense of
equites equo publico
only. An attempt to reconcile the traditions has been made by E. Gabba,
Athenaeum
, 1956, 124 ff., who argues that both can be accepted: Sulla will first have drawn on normal sources including men who had served him well (cf. the filling of the Senate after Cannae by Fabius Buteo: Livy, 23, 22) and then revived the idea attributed to Gaius Gracchus and Drusus of adding 300 Equites; if the Equites were added partly because of the law-courts, this would help to explain the curious procedure by which (according to Appian,
BC
, 1, 100) they were chosen (Gabba compares the election of jurors in the centumviral tribunal). This attractive solution depends partly on the total number of the post-Sullan Senate, which Mommsen put at 600, but it would not be impossible if the figure should be only 500: Sulla would still have 350 vacancies to fill. (The highest attested attendance is 417 in 61 B.C., excluding magistrates: Cic.
ad Att.
1. 14. 5.) For a list of the known Sullan senators see E. Gabba,
Athenaeum
, 1951, 267 ff. See also J. R. Hawthorn,
Gr. and R.
, 1962, 53 ff. For the view that Sulla wished to give the Equites (or their leaders) greater share in government, as opposed to the common theory of Sulla as an enemy of the equestrian order, see E. Gabba,
Athenaeum
, 1957, 139,
Parola del Passato
, 1956, 363 ff. Badian (
Historia
, 1962, 232) writes that ‘a decisive argument against the traditional view of Sulla’s hatred of the Equites’ is stressed by Gabba (
PP
, 1956) namely that Sulla, unlike Drusus, did not make the Equites liable to charges of judicial corruption. Gabba (
Ann. Pisa
, 1964, 1 ff.) links Sulla’s reform with that proposed by Drusus (see above n. 4). For Gabba’s articles in
Athenaeum
, 1956, 1951 and
Ann. Pisa
, 1964, see now
RR, Army
142 ff., 59 ff., 131 ff., and for the Sullan senators see C. Nicolet,
L’ordre équestre à l’époque republicaine
, I (1966), 581 ff. Sulla’s general legislative programme is discussed by R. E. Marino,
Aspetti della politica interna di Sulla
(1974). [p. 69]

40 THE CENSORSHIP. G. Tibiletti (
Studia et Docum. Hist et Juris
, 1959, 121 ff.) believes that Sulla exercised censorial powers and celebrated a
lustrum
; he may have enrolled new citizens passed over in the registration of 86–85 (cf. L. R. Taylor,
Voting Districts
, 119). His power as dictator would have enabled him, in person or by delegation, to execute the tasks usually done by the censors. On the censorship in the late Republic see T. P. Wiseman,
JRS
, 1969, 59 ff. [p. 69]

41 THE TRIBUNATE. The sources are not always clear on matters of detail. Thus Livy (
Perioch.
89) says that Sulla ‘omne ius legum ferendarum ademit’, but there are two laws known which
may
have been passed by tribunes before their powers were restored in 70 B.C. (
lex Antonia de Termessibus
and
lex Plautia de reditu Lepidanorum
; both probably in accord with senatorial wishes). Similarly, the evidence about the tribunes’ veto given by Cicero does not square with what Caesar says, and there are one or two possible examples of tribunes using their veto in these years, e.g. a tribune may have vetoed proceedings against C. Antonius in 76. [p. 70]

42 LEX ANNALIS. On the
cursus honorum
see A. E. Astin,
The Lex Annalis before Sulla
(1958). He concludes that the minimum ages for curule office were fixed and that both before and after Sulla they were 36 for aediles, 39 for praetors and 42 for consuls. It is uncertain whether there was a fixed minimum age for the pre-Sullan quaestorship (which was normally held before 30); Sulla will have established this, but with no fixed interval after the quaestorship (cf. E. Badian,
JRS
, 1959, 81 ff. =
Studies
, 140 ff.). [p. 67]