A2 Unit AH4 (Entry Code F394): Roman History: the use and abuse of power
Option 1: The fall of the Roman Republic 81–31 BC
Prepared by Douglas Cairns from the previous notes by Miriam Griffin
The thematic focus of this option is the way in which key events and key individuals in
Roman politics led to the fall of the Republic and brought about one-man rule.
Candidates will be expected to have read a selection of appropriate original sources on the
following topics, and to refer to them in supporting their answers:
• the changing distribution of power during this period;
• the importance of institutions and individuals (including Sulla, Pompey, Crassus, Caesar,
Cicero, Cato, Clodius, Catiline, Antony, Octavian);
• the challenges made by these individuals and factions to the authority of the Senate, and
the various responses to emergencies;
• the extent of participation by citizens and the growing importance of the plebs and their
demands;
• the means by which politicians in this period achieved success;
• the development of violence and fraud as a political tool in Rome;
• the developing importance of military and provincial commands in the Roman political
system;
• the social and economic effects of conflict on the Roman world.
Bibliography for Roman History
Schools which have access to JSTOR (which may be available in some public libraries, too)
can target particular topics. The following may be found useful.
Light introduction (for the summer between Years 12 and 13)
One very good way of 'getting into' the period is to read the detective novels about
Gordianus the Finder (a kind of Roman Hercule Poirot) by Steven Saylor. Titles such as
Murder on the Appian Way, Catilina's Riddle, The Venus Throw. They all with events and
characters within the period you will be studying and are superb recreations of Roman
politics and social life. Highly recommended. Saylor said that M. Grant’s Penguin
translation Cicero’s Murder Trial changed his life. Don’t forget bits of the HBO/BBC series
Rome.
General
As ever, the magisterial The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 9 [2nd edition, 1994] is the
standard work, but it is rather forbidding. The first edition (1930) by Hugh Last is more
entertaining to read though it carries the flavour of the politics of its day.
Rosenstein, Nathan and Robert Morstein-Marx (eds). A Companion to the Roman Republic.
Blackwell Publishing, 2006.
2
M.Crawford, The Roman Republic (2nd ed.) - very stimulating but to be used once you have
mastered some of the basic facts.
Basics
P. Bradley, Ancient Rome
Scullard, From the Gracchi to Nero
K.Bringmann, A History of the Roman Republic
This is more stimulating that Scullard but suffers from vast swathes of text without
headings. Someone should produce a guide with page numbers to it.
PREVIOUS MODULE NOTES:
Scullard. is probably still the best standard modern account, but regularly offers untranslated Latin,
covers much ground in a few lines, writes long paragraphs without sub-titles, reels off series of facts
without indicating which are more significant, has almost no maps or charts (though one useful datechart of the whole period), quotes very few ancient writers and sometimes puts important material in
the notes at the back; Bradley is more readable and has good charts, maps, flow-charts, timelines,
bulleted lists, but is sometimes superficial and isn’t always accurate]
The following books are very much a personal choice; the list is highly selective and no
doubt many of your own cherished favourites are missing. The previous JACT notes referr
to LACTOR 7 but it is out-of-print and it is unlikely that a replacement volume will be
published. LACTOR is, however, looking into putting some key passages on line. Watch this
space: http://www.lactor.kcl.ac.uk/summ.htm
The dynasts
Matthias Gelzer, Caesar – very detailed
Christian Meier, Caesar – no footnotes/references but very readable
Adrian Goldsworthy, Caesar - very popular with students
Robin Seager, Pompey – use the second edition
John Leach, Pompey
Pat Southern, Pompey
W. Jeffrey Tatum, The Patrician Tribune: Publius Clodius Pulcher. (The University of North
Carolina Press, 1999)
A. Keaveney, Sulla (2nd ed.)
Sources
D.L.Stockton, Cicero - a political biography
Ronald Syme, Sallust
For Plutarch there are articles by Chris Pelling in JHS. Very helpful is the OUP World’s
Classics translation by Robin Waterfield which has excellent notes by Philip Stadter (his
intro. to each life is very valuable).
Lintott, Cicero as evidenc. Recent book, very helpful in sifting through the mass of evidence.
I favour using the P.G.Walsh translation for OUP which is arranged chronologically and easy
to find your way around.
3
Constitutional history
Complex : A. Lintott The Constitution of the Roman republic - very difficult read
P.A. Brunt, Fall of Roman Republic – pick your chapters; also complex
Social
P.A. Brunt, Social conflict in the Roman republic is a terrific read - but it is out of print {?}.
The Library is trying to obtain a copy but you could try www.abebooks.co.uk/ AMAZON ‘new
and used’ for a cheap 2nd hand copy. Well worth it.
F.Millar, The Crowd in Rome in the Late Republic (Thomas Spencer Jerome Lectures). Good
for the bullet-point above: extent of participation by citizens and the growing importance of
the plebs and their demands;
P.A.Brunt, Italian manpower - massive and dense but you might dip into it.
Archaeological
Amanda Claridge, Rome (Oxford Archaeological Guide) is one of the best guides to the sites.
F Coarelli, Rome and Environs An Archaeological Guide (Prof. Coarelli is the doyen of
experts on the site of Rome)
Empire
A.Lintott, Imperium Romanum: Politics and Administration
Craige B. Champion Roman Imperialism: Readings and Sources (Interpreting Ancient
History). This has a very stimulating intro on imperialism by Champion and Arthur M.
Eckstein.
4
Historiography
John H. Arnold, History - a very short introduction (OUP, 2000)
This little book gives you a wonderful survey of how historians deal with history and it may
give you ideas of your own on new ways of interpreting the history that you study. There is
also Richard Evans, In defence of history. It is proving very controversial - see
http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/Whatishistory/evans.html
It may be interesting to use some of the following (provocative) material for discussion at
the end of the course. (The source for below comes from my reading of EVANS.)
Ancient views
a. Sempronius Asellio (c.133 BC) fr. 2: jejune, meagre annalistic history – plain notices
of dates, persons, places and events – “cannot in any way make people more
enthusiastic to defend their country or more reluctant to do wrong”.
b. Quintilian 10.1.31: “historiography is very close to poetry and is rather like a poem in
prose”.
Postmodernist view, 1980s
c. History - “not a record of the past, more or less faithful to the facts, but an invention
or fiction of historians.” Raphael Samuel
d. Nancy Partner (USA, Mediaevalist): historical facts become constructed artefacts no
different from any made thing or fiction in cognitive origin.
e. Dominick LaCapra : documents are texts that rework reality and not mere sources
that divulge facts about reality.
f. Barthes 1968 –the historians’ claim to reconstruct past reality rests on a pretence.
Historical writing is “an inscription on the past pretending to be a likeness of it.”
The History of History
g. Benedetto Croce: “All history is contemporary history” [1941], i.e. all history is
written, consciously or unconsciously, from the perspective of the present.
h. History is not simply a matter of objective fact. “Study the historian before you
study his facts.” E.H.Carr 1961 THIS IS VERY RELEVANT TO CICERO AND SALLUST.
A modern view on ancient history
i. Livy and Plutarch cheerfully repeat page upon page of earlier accounts over which
they neither have nor seek any control. Therefore the ancients had a radically
different notion of the nature and purpose of the historical exercise.
j.
We underestimate the ability of the ancients to invent and their capacity to believe.
5
k. Objectivity is pure illusion – the barest bones of any historical narrative, the events
selected and arrayed in a temporal sequence, imply a value judgment/judgments.
(all statements by Moses Finley 1985)
Topic 1a
Sources
Highly selective notes; see LACTOR introduction or OCD for the basics. What follows below
are simply a few observations.
Plutarch
Discourage the knee-jerk reaction that Plutarch was a biographer and not writing history
therefore he is no t really useful or he only deals with character. He had access to sources
we no longer have. E.g. he had read Sulla’s memoirs. Pompey v. Sertorius: had Plutarch
uncritically swallowed Pompey’s propaganda? Try to pick out the phrases in the text that
look suspicious. LINTOTT Cicero points out pp.278ff. that the build-up to the Civil War in
Caesar and Pompey is very rich and may derive from Asinius Pollio.
Cicero
Like Thucydides, he is both actor et auctor. But was he a small man who over-rated himself?
His view was limited: see CHRISTIAN MEIER, Caesar 230-1. Discourage the hagiography!
Sallust
Use the vital evidence of the fragments of the Histories as well as Catiline. They are at the
end of the Penguin trans. of Catiline. Beware the moralist tone. Look for hypocrisy.
Increasingly I question whether he was right to see a moral decline as a result of the lack of
a metus hostilis after 146 BC. There were still plenty of foreign enemies.
The nature of ancient history; ancient and modern historians; languages; interpretation
(S.Usher The Historians of Greece and Rome ch. pp 241-253 for Velleius, Appian, Cassius
Dio).
Internet
For pictures of sites etc. www. flickr.com is superb and a first port-of-call.
Typing PPT into google plus a topic e.g. Caesar.. will give you access to some ready-made
PowerPoints.
6
Topic 1a
General introduction
Some timeline and very brief summary of Roman history is very desirable, but this depends
on a number of factors: the topic of Roman history done for AS, how far back to go from
81BC. It is better for students of this age to begin with some exciting narrative than some
others options available.
A brief one/two lesson sketch of events from 241BC :
 conflict with Carthage,
 acquisition of Sicily as first ‘province’ (whatever the term meant at that date),
 wars with Hannibal and Macedon,
 two provinces of Spain 196,
 annexation of Macedonia in 148,
 Carthage & Corinth 133
 Gracchi
 Marius (Cimbri and Teutones, Jugurtha); repeated consulships
 Social War 91-89
Topic 1b
Cursus honorum
Get the students to research the Roman constitution on the internet and in the OCD;
suggest some reputable sites. A test (short answer type questions) could be set.
It is
greatly to the students’ advantage to have a basic working knowledge of it before you begin
the actual prescribed areas of study.
Examples:
* cursus honorum - what is it? its importance?
* consul, praetor, aedile, tribune etc. - functions/number; famous tribunes? the
tribunician veto
* patrician/ plebeian,
* equites: the equestrian order
* laws concerned with significant changes to constitution
* Lex Hortensia - 287 BC, Lex Licinia Sextia - 367 BC, Lex Canuleia - 445BC
* censors, lustrum
* novus homo,
* assemblies (comitia tributa, centuriata) and (briefly) their workings,
* concilium plebis
* Senate - function; number of members; who were members
* generals
* republic - definition; date of founding
* dictator - including an example of.
* imperium (= the power a general might hold)
The optimates: their programme, Cicero In Defence of Sestius 96-105 in LACTOR 7 pp19-25;
OCD s.v. ‘optimates, populares’; some names, Brunt Fall of Roman Republic 471-488
7
Topic 2a
Awaiting Sulla
Give more detail and establish a narrative chronology of events from Sulla’s first consulship
in 88 until his taking of Rome in November 81.
Topic 2b
Sulla's dictatorship and reforms, 81-78 BC
‘Why were Sulla’s constitutional reforms needed, and which aspects of Rome and her
Empire did they affect?’
GENERAL PRACTICE
The basic minimum to for students to read and make notes from one textbook, for example
BRINGMANN. They should certainly aim to read at least one other article on a list with
which you provide them (below is a suggestion). Reading of the SOURCES - the final item on
each list - is absolutely vital.













CAH ix = Cambridge Ancient History volume 9 (2nd edition)
OCD = Oxford Classical Dictionary (2nd edition)
Le Glay = Le Glay etc/ revised David Cherry, A history of Rome pages 100-132
Beard & Crawford Rome = Rome in the late republic (London, 1989)
Brunt, Conflicts = P.A. Brunt, Social conflicts in the Roman republic
Seager = Robin Seager, Pompey
Leach = John Leach, Pompey the Great
Southern = Pat Southern, Pompey
Gelzer = Matthias Gelzer, Caesar
Meier = Christian Meier, Caesar
Gruen = E. Gruen, The last generation of the Roman republic
Holland = Tom Holland, Rubicon – generally an easy and enjoyable read with a
good overview of the main issues.
Check also for articles on JSTOR.
A. Sulla - the proscriptions
a. Scullard pp.78-79
b. Bradley 287-288
c. Bringmann
d. CAH ix.197-199
e. D.L.Stockton: Cicero 8-12
f. Le Glay etc. 113 - 120
g. SOURCES: Plutarch, Sulla 31-32; Cicero, Pro Roscio - a key document for
understanding the atmosphere of Sulla’s dictatorship; Stockton Cicero 8-12 has a
useful commentary on this speech.
8
B. Sulla's dictatorship & reforms, 81-78 BC
Sulla’s laws of 81 BC
 how to strengthen the senate
 how to restrict the political power of the tribunate
 how to control magistrates
 how to increase the number of qualified men available for key posts
 how to avoid the dangers from provincial proconsuls
 and some topics that are not directly constitutional but need to be covered:
 how to improve the jury-system
 other measures affecting the people, e.g. abolition of corn dole
 measures affecting Italy, esp. colonies
Sulla’s triumph; resignation from dictatorship (before end of 81?); remarriage; elections for
78 (Scullard does not give enough weight to Sulla’s active efforts, as recorded by Plutarch
and Appian to stop Lepidus being elected consul, see A.Keaveney Sulla: the Last Republican
210); death early 78 (Plutarch Sulla 34-37)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
Scullard: ch.4:10-12
Bradley chapter 15, especially *282-293
CAH ix.199-207
Southern 27 - 39
OCD article on 'Cornelius SULLA Felix' by E. Badian.
A. Keaveney, Sulla, the last republican 149-228 (be selective.)
Brunt, Conflicts 107-111
E. Gruen, The last generation of the Roman republic 6-12
Beard & Crawford Rome 8-10
SOURCES: Plutarch, Sulla 33, 34-37; LACTOR 13 for more detailed (and N.B.
contradictory) evidence
k. JSTOR articles might include:
‘Sulla Felix’ J. P. V. D. Balsdon JRS 41 (1951), 1-10
‘Waiting for Sulla’ E. Badian JRS 52 (1962), 47-61
‘The Clemency of Sulla’ Melissa Barden Dowling: Historia 49 (2000), 303-340
‘Sulla's Propaganda: The Collapse of the Cinnan Republic’ Bruce W. Frier AJP 92 (1971), 585604
‘Spectacles and Sulla's Public Image’ Geoffrey S. Sumi Historia: 51 (2002), 414-432
9
Topic 3 Challenges to Sullan constitution & prestige of the senate, 78-71 BC
A summary of the issues
•
•
•
•
•
Might be useful to divide up into ‘External’ (TOPIC 3) + ‘Internal’ (TOPIC 4) challenges
Did the Senate deal adequately and wisely with the military threats of the 70s BC?
70 BC = a turning-point in Roman political life?
Did anything survive from Sulla’s constitution?
Pompey’s exceptional powers – in what sense did they wreck Sulla’s intentions?
More detailed:
 the armed uprising of Lepidus in Italy, 77 (Plut. Pompey 16)
 the campaigns of Sertorius and his generals in Spain, 79-72 (Plut. Pompey 17-21)
 the war against Mithridates, which continues through the decade of the 70s in the
East (Lacey and Wilson no.13 is from Plutarch Lucullus; Bradley’s summary on 286
and 314 is useful)
 the slave revolt of Spartacus in Italy, 73-71 (Plut. Crassus 8-11; Pompey 21)
 role of slavery in society might be discussed here: see Slavery and Society at Rome
(Key Themes in Ancient History) by Keith Bradley
 the continuing battle against the pirates in the Mediterranean (Plut. Pompey 24)
 [NB Mithridates and the pirates are dealt with by Pompey in 67 and 66-63 so full
treatment could be deferred to section TOPIC 5a]
The above are usually referred to as the ‘external’ challenges to the senate in the 70s;
however, while these are going on there are equally stressful ‘internal’ challenges being
mounted to Sulla’s senate in Rome itself… see TOPIC 4
Two possible essays:
In what ways, and with what success, did Sulla strengthen the position of the Senate?
How much influence did tribunes have on Roman politics in the period after 70 BC?
Selected secondary reading
a. Scullard chapter 5: sections1-4
b. Bringmann
c. Bradley 304-308 (military events only); see also pages 286 and 314 for summary of
war against Mithridates.
d. CAH ix.208-223
e. Seager 30-39
f. Leach 34-54
g. Southern 39 - 53
h. Gruen 12-46 – a very different view
SOURCES: Plutarch, Pompey 16-21 (armed uprising of Lepidus; campaign against Sertorius);
Plut. Crassus 8-11; Pompey 21 (Spartacus); Plut. Pompey 24 (pirates)
Sallust, Speech of tribune Macer (Can be found in an appendix to the Penguin trans. of
Catiline)
10
Cicero, Verres 1.35-47 – corruption in senatorial juries.
Topic 4
Internal challenges to the senate in the 70s BC
‘How did it come about that the year 70 BC was a turning-point in Roman political life? Did
anything survive from Sulla’s constitution? Do the tribunes now undergo a change of role?’
Mounting pressures on the senate, 77-71:
 the programme of Lepidus in 78-77
 new citizens in Rome; Italians in the senate
 tribunician agitation (Sallust Speech of Macer)
 corruption in the senatorial juries (Cicero Against Verres 1,35-47)
 extortion in the provinces (not only by Verres)(see L & R)
 fragmentation of senatorial factions in the later 70s (see Gruen ch.2)
The events of the year 71-70 BC:
 return of Pompey from Spain (Plutarch)
 demand for the consulship by Pompey and Crassus (Plutarch)
 restoration of powers to the tribunate
 election of new censors
 the prosecution of Verres by Cicero, acting for the islanders of Sicily, midsummer 70 (Lacey and Wilson nos. 6-12; Stockton Cicero ch. 3)
Pompey’s exceptional powers (summary): in what sense did they wreck Sulla’s intentions?
 How much was left of Sulla’s constitution? The cursus honorum structure, the
restrictions on proconsuls and the system of lawcourts remained in place as before;
but the tribunate and the censorship had recovered their powers, the composition
of juries had changed, armies abroad had become more professional and proconsuls
were likely to be granted greater and longer powers
Selected secondary reading (see also above)
a. CAH IX 223-228; Scullard 5:1-4 (excluding military)
b. Seager Pompey ch. 3
c. Stockton Cicero ch.3, pp41-49
d. Gruen 23-37 (on the internal challenges); 37-46 (G. thinks that Pompey did not
‘destroy the Sullan system’ at all)
e. BRINGMANN
Topic 5a
Pompey, Caesar, Crassus and the populares, 69-61
Special commands, tribunes, the problem of Mithridates, Lucullus, the rise of Caesar,
Clodius. This may be a time to discuss the nature of Roman imperialism. Craige B
Champion’s book is very useful and it has sources.
Cicero In support of the Manilian Law (either complete in Penguin Cicero Selected Political
Speeches, or central passages in LACTOR 7 or Lacey and Wilson or Lewis & Reinhold vol.1);
Plutarch Pompey 24-45
11









The praetorship of Cicero
Pompey’s earlier career up to 67 (Bradley 368-375 has a timeline of the careers of
Pompey, Crassus, Caesar and Cicero)
The pirate situation up to 67 (Plut. Pompey 24-25)
The passing of the Gabinian Law, 67
Tribunes and the increasing importance of the plebs
Pompey’s pirate command in the Mediterranean, 67
o The passing of the Manilian Law, with Cicero’s speech and main arguments
(Mithridates’ threat to Asia (chs. 4-19),
o P.’s qualities (27-50),
o argument from precedent demolished (60-68),
o moral argument (see also 40-41)
Pompey’s Eastern campaigns (brief resume in e.g. Scullard, or Bradley who gives map
and charts) leading to death of Mithridates
the Eastern Settlement of Pompey (summary). Rome is now inextricably involved
with the east.
The implications of P’s commands for the Sullan constitution
Selected secondary reading
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Topic 5b
Scullard ch.5 sections 7-10
Bradley 368-375 has a timeline of the careers of the politicians.
Plutarch, Pompey 24-45
CAH ix. Chapter 8a
SEAGER chapters 4-5
D.L.Stockton, Cicero 52-61
Leach
B. McGing pp.80-88 in Blackwell Companion to the Hellenistic World, 2003
Politics at Rome in Pompey’s absence 66-62
‘How did the political scene at Rome alter in Pompey’s absence 66-62 BC?’
The rise of Caesar who was not particularly distinguished up until now (Goldsworthy).
On Catiline see the OCR website notes p. 12
SOURCES: Plutarch, Caesar 5-10; Cicero 28-29 , Sallust Catiline





Caesar’s early career to 66 (see article by L.R.Taylor ‘The rise of Julius Caesar’, Greece
and Rome 26 (1957), 10ff)
Crassus’ intrigues in Spain, Gaul, Egypt, the Rullan land bill, and how they mirror the
popularis programme
the so-called ‘First’ Catilinarian conspiracy, 66-65
the election of Cicero to the consulship, 64
the events of 63 including the main Catiline conspiracy and its failure in 62
12



Clodius and the Bona Dea scandal and trial, 62-61 (LACTOR 7, pp 58-62; Plut. Cicero
28-29)
Cicero’s hopes for a concordia ordinum (=‘harmony between senate and equites’)
(Scullard p.111 is littered with essential, but untranslated, Latin terms)
the return of Pompey, December 62
Selected secondary reading
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Topic 6
L.R.Taylor, ‘The rise of Julius Caesar’ , Greece & Rome 26 (1957), 10ff.
Scullard ch.6 sections 1-3
Bradley
SEAGER chapter 6
GELZER pages 19 –
MEIER pages
W. Jeffrey Tatum, The Patrician Tribune: Publius Clodius Pulcher(North
Carolina, 1999), chapter 3
The ‘First Triumvirate’ and its programme, 60-56
‘What led Caesar, Crassus and Pompey to form the so-called First Triumvirate? Why did it
need to be re-established at the conference of Luca in 56 BC?’
Intransigence and sterility of Caesar’s opponents.
SOURCES: (basic) sources as below, nearly all available in +J.P.Sabben-Clare Caesar and
Roman Politics, 60-50 BC which has a variety of sources topically arranged; letters of Cicero
have already been noticed, but now come to the fore (use WALSH trans.); Plutarch Pompey
47-51, Caesar 13-14, Crassus 14; LACTOR 7 chs. 6, 7 (pp 62-73)






Pompey’s triumph, 61
Optimate obstruction to Pompey, Crassus and Caesar, 61-60, on P.’s Eastern
settlement and land for veterans, Crasus’s remission to tax-gatherers (publicani),
Caes.’s desire for consulship; note also Cato’s refusal to allow Pompey to marry his
niece, and the insult to Caesar over his allocated province
Formation of the first triumvirate (Suetonius Caesar 19 and Plut. Pompey 47, Crassus
14, Caesar 13 differ in details but all illuminating; also Dio in L & W no.13; n.b. Cicero
himself doesn’t seem to know when they first got together) and what was in it for
each of them. Discuss what the people at the time called it (coniuratio, threeheaded monster etc.)
Caesar’s first consulship, 59: the popularis ship gets under full steam with the land
bill, Campanian Law, Eastern settlement, tax-collectors’ remission, proconsulship for
himself, Egypt, on provincial corruption, publication of senate’s decrees etc.
Criticism of the triumvirate, esp. in Cicero’s letters of 59
‘Agents’ of the triumvirate; Clodius’ transference to plebeians; was Clodius a free
agent?
13






o see article ‘P.Clodius Pulcher -- Felix Catilina?’ by A.W.Lintott, Greece and
Rome 14 (1967) 157-169
Clodius’ tribunate of 58: measures on censors, omen-watching, free corn, collegia,
Cicero, Cato
Attacks on Pompey, 58-57
Recall of Cicero, 57
Cicero and senate woo Pompey
Rift in triumvirate and reaction of Caesar
Conference of Luca, April 56 (one of Scullard’s rare mistakes, followed by Bradley,
occurs in the minor detail of how many senators went to Luca: a misreading of Plut.
Caes. 21? Gelzer Caesar 121 n.5 suggests exaggeration by the sources anyway)
*SEAGER Pompey ch.10 esp. pp. 117ff.
Selected secondary reading
a. CAH IX ch.9, pp365-7, ch.10 pp368-394, interwoven with Gallic and Eastern
affairs;
b. Scullard 6:4-6;
c. Stockton ch.7;
d. Rawson ch.6;
e. Gelzer ch. 3, and 4 pp102-123
f. BRINGMANN
Topic 6a Caesar in Gaul - optional
A couple of lessons: how much detail is optional, but bring out the special nature of what
Caesar was doing. Is this a clear example of the ‘War Machine’/ ‘Born to be wolves’ model
of Roman imperialism? See on the terms: Craige Champion
Sallust’s statement in Catiline is vital: Caesar longed for a command in which his qualities
could be displayed. His jealousy of Pompey’s eastern triumphs was a catalyst in bringing on
the civil war.
Sources
Plut. Caesar 15-27;
Caesar The Conquest of Gaul worth dipping into, esp. on battle with Nervii, 57 (pp65-70),
and siege of Alesia, 52 (pp 189-200)







Caesar’s proconsulship and death of Metellus, 59
Geography and situation of Gaul
Caesar defeats the Helvetii, 58
The reduction of Gaul: Ariovistus, the Nervii and the Veneti, 58-56
Germany and Britain, 55-54
Renewed opposition in Gaul, 54-53
Alesia and surrender of Vercingetorix, 52

The importance of the Gallic conquests
Selected secondary reading
14
a.
b.
c.
d.
CAH IX ch.10, extracted from 381-391, 408-417;
Scullard 7:1-4;
Bradley 348-354 sets out the material more readably;
Gelzer ch.4
Topic 7 Caesar, Pompey and the slide to war, 56-48
‘Why did Caesar cross the Rubicon? What did this mean for Pompey?’
See APPENDIX. This is a very vexed question which probably even the ancients did not fully
understand.
READING: (basic) CAH IX 394-433; Caear Civil War 3, 85-101 (on Pharsalus); Plutarch Caesar
32-47, Pompey 52-80; Scullard 6:7-8 (to Rubicon), 7:5-6 (to Pharsalus); LACTOR 7, ch. 8, esp.
pp.83-92; Lacey and Wilson nos. 43, 48, 55, 62, 64; Suetonius Caesar 23-33.
















Consequences of Luca incl. political sidelining of Cicero, 56 (-44)
Second consulship of Pompey and Crassus, 55
Rome’s war with Parthia (Scullard 124)
Death of Julia, 54
Battle of Carrhae and death of Crassus, 53 (for blow-by-blow account, Plut. Crassus
16-33)
Dissolution of First Triumvirate
Death of Clodius and end of gangster war, Jan. 52 (LACTOR 7 ch. 7 esp. pp73-77)
Measures of Pompey (sole consul) in 52
Attacks on Caesar
Curio and the Optimates, 50
Caesar crosses the Rubicon, Jan 10, 49
Optimate responsibility for civil war
Civil War in Italy, Africa and Spain, 49
Civil War in Greece, 49-48
Battle of Pharsalus, 48
Death of Pompey, September 48
Selected secondary reading
a. Gelzer Caesar pp123-245 (sel.);
b. LINTOTT Cicero as evidence 270ff.
c. W. Jeffrey Tatum, Always I Am Caesar Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2008 ch. 6 is
very readable and helpful
d. Sabben-Clare nos. 183-409 (sel.);
e. Stockton chs. 8,9 and 10 pp246-253;
f. Seager Pompey ch.13;
g. article by P.A.Brunt ‘The Roman Mob’, Past and Present 35 (1966) = Studies in
Ancient Society 74-102
h. See appendix in this document
15
Topic 8 Civil War
Why did it last for more than three years after the death of Pompey?’
Sources
Plut. Caesar 32-47; 48-56 (a precis of Caesar Civil War); Pompey 52-80
Caesar, Civil War 3.85-101 (on Pharsalus)





Caesar in Egypt, 48-47
Battle of Zela, 47
Defeat of the Pompeians in Africa, 47-46; death of Cato, 46
Defeat of Pompeians in Spain at Munda, 45
Overview of Caesar’s generalship
Selected secondary reading
a. CAH IX.394-433
b. Gelzer, Caesar123-245
c. Seager, Pompey §13
d. Scullard ch.7, pp138-142
e. BRINGMANN
Topic 9
Caesar: dictator, reformer, victim, 49-44
TOPIC: ‘What were Julius Caesar’s plans for Rome? Who killed him, and why? Did he aim at
being REX? The model of the Hellenistic monarchy?
READING: (basic) Plut. Caesar 56-69; Suetonius Julius Caesar 75-89; CAH IX ch.11; Scullard 7:5-10;
Lacey & Wilson 290-312; LACTOR 7 94-97; (further) Syme Roman Revolution ch.5; Gelzer ch.6; +L.
Ross Taylor Party Politics in the Age of Caesar ch.8 ‘Catonism and Caesarism’ isolates the personal
factors on each side; Yavetz Julius Caesar and his Public Image

Caesar’s dictatorships and other titles

His plans for reform –the sheer range in mind-boggling

His unRepublican behaviour: attitude to the constitution, the senate, his own worship; other
causes for concern (Cleopatra, Parthia)

The formation of the conspiracy (note that Cicero’s In Support of Marcellus=Lacey & Wilson
no.68, mentions rumours of a plot in 46) and the timing of the plot

The assassination, Ides of March 44

[Immediate aftermath (CAH IX ch.12)]
16
Very useful is the chapter at the end of Rosenstein, Nathan and Robert Morstein-Marx (eds). A
Companion to the Roman Republic. Blackwell Publishing, 2006 : was it a ‘fall’ or a
‘transformation’?
Topic 10
Octavian, Antony and Lepidus
See the OCR website notes pages 16-19
17
APPENDIX
The final crisis leading to civil war in 49 and Cicero
Lintott, Cicero as evidence is the basis of much that is here. These notes may help sort out
some of the formidable problems in understanding these years.
53 BC
Carrhae
52
January: Bovillae – Clodius killed. Senate house burned down. SCU
Battle of Alesia in Gaul
20 day supplicatio for Caesar’s victory
Law of Ten Tribunes (including M. Caelius Rufus)1: Caesar to get permission to stand for
consulship in his absence. Pompey agrees. But a law about professio (standing in person)
obscures the situation; Pompey exempts Caesar – but how legally valid was this?
51
September: Pacorus, son of Orodes, and the Parthians cross the Euphrates at Zeugma.
November: reports reach Rome of this.
“Curio, darling of the plebs since his spectacular games, is now married to Clodius’ widow.
He is thought to be hostile to Caesar.”2
Pompey and Cicero meet at Tarentum.
2 Sept: Caelius curule aedile; wants panthers from Cicero
50
Jan/Feb: Curio (tribune) becomes more dramatically popularis; makes a speech in support of
Caesar. Appian and Dio Cassius say he had been bribed by C. long before. Caelius - Curio’s
friend and in touch with gossip – says nothing.3
1 March: Scipio, father-in-law of Pompey wants debate about Gallic province – much to
displeasure of Balbus, Caesar’s political agent. L. Paullus, presiding consul, defers
discussion.
April: Caelius reports that P. has demanded C. leave his province on Ides of November.
Fam.8.11.1-3. Senate worries about Parthians: both P and C give up one legion to help in
Syria. P. names his legion as the one he ‘lent’ to Caesar in 53BC.4 Caesar has apparently
decided not to seek consulship in July 50 (for 49) but in 49 (for 48).
Pompey falls in Campania. The universal joy in the country when he recovers encourages
him dangerously.
1
T.P.Wiseman CAH 92, 412, 416
T.P.Wiseman CAH 92, 417-423
3
Lintott, Cicero as evidence (Oxford, 2008), 271 n.58
4
Caesar/Hirtius BGall. 8.54.1-3; Caesar, BCiv 1.32.6; Dio Cassius 41.65
2
18
Cicero, ad fam.8.8.9: a letter from Caelius who says that people believed Pompey had a
problem with Caesar.5
Did C. want a consulship AND a command (e.g. against Parthia)?
Mid-summer: Cicero sails home from Cilicia. ‘I am truly worried about the condition of the
republic. I am a supporter of Curio, I desire Caesar to be held in honour, I can die for
Pompey; but nothing is dearer to me than the republic itself.’ Cicero, ad fam.2.15.36
July: two Pompeian consuls elected: Lentulus Crus and C. Marcellus7. Cicero hears of this 29
Sept. at Ephesus (Att. 6.8.2). By 14 October he is in Athens.
Caelius says that if one of the two did not go to fight the Parthians, it could be a contest by
armed force. Both sides were ready. Fortune was promoting a vast and delightful
gladiatorial contest (spectaculum) for Cicero, if he could find a safe seat. Cicero, ad
fam.8.14.48
Caesar had hoped his made Sergius Sulpicius Galba would be elected. BGall.8.50.4
August: Caelius writes, ‘If neither of the two goes off to the Parthian War, I see great
quarrels ahead in which strength and steel will be the arbiters.’ Fam 8.14.4
24 November: Cicero lands at Brundisium, thence to his villa at Formiae. Publically he was
for Pompey; privately peace at any cost.9
Mid-November: Parthian threat, reported by Caelius in Cicero, ad fam.8.10.2-3
Disappearance of the Parthian threat: mixed blessing for P or C could have been sent.10
P. now argues it’s fair for C. to leave his province on 13 November, the end of the campaign
season. Curio promises last-ditch resistance.
C’s proposal that both give up their armies threatens P’s supremacy, engineered in 52, and
show his distrust of P.
Att. 7.1.2 [=WALSH 66]11 Cicero hovers between the two but may see P. as Pericles against
the Spartan demands in 432BC. ‘I like any post on the Athenian acropolis.’
‘I agree with Gnaeus Pompeius’ Att. 7.3.4-5 – “but he would urge him towards reconciliation
because of the threat to the republic from civil war. They were dealing with a most
audacious and well-organised man, who had on his side all the condemned, all the
disgraced, all those who deserved to be condemned or disgraced, almost all the young men,
the whole of the corrupted urban populace, powerful tribunes now joined by Quintus
Cassius and all those in debt.”12
Early December: Senate passes motion that C. lay down his command. Curio caps this by
saying both P and C should do so. 370 to 22 agree with him. His main aim was to show
how small the factio opposition of 22 was. He had not specified WHEN the great men
5
Lintott, Cicero as evidence (Oxford, 2008), 269f.
LINTOTT 272
7
brother of consul of 51 and cousin of his namesake of 50
8
LINTOTT 273
9
WISEMAN 421 n.207
10
LINTOTT 270
11
LINTOTT 274
12
Lintott’s summary of the letter p. 276. The list recalls the Catilinarians.
6
19
should resign! But in a fury C. Marcellus does to Pompey (in his villa in the Alban hills) and
places a sword in his hands, asking him to save the state.13
9 December [?]: Cicero meets P. at Cumae for 2 hour talk. P. gives impression of no hope of
a settlement, citing recent embassy of Hirtius from Caesar – he departed quickly by night.
Clear proof of Caesar’s alienation. Att. 7.4.2ff [=WALSH 67]
Cicero : they should have resisted Caesar while he was weak. Now he has eleven legions.
Att. 7.7.4ff. He did not question C’s right to be a candidate in absentia, undesirable as it
was.14
10 December: new tribunes; Curio steps down from office.
Even if Caesar left his command in Gaul, he would not lose imperium until he crossed the
pomoerium, in a triumph for 1 Jan 48. Pompey had taken 9 months to prepare his Asiatic
triumph.
25 December, late afternoon: private meeting between Cicero and Pompey at Formiae.15 P.
expects a political revolution if C becomes consul.
49
1 January: Caesar sends a letter that says he will yield his imperium if P. does so too. **Plut.
Caesar 30-31: his letter must have mentioned his dignitas. Curio delivers the letter but
tribunes Antonius and Q. Cassius cannot persuade the senate to have it read. They read it
at a contio. Senate passes decree: C. to release his army or be declared a hostis. Domitius
Ahenobarbus is to replace him in Gaul
2 January: Cicero at P’s Alban villa trying to broker peace; birthday on 3rd – aged 57.
Plutarch says P. was prepared to yield but was overruled by Lentulus Crus’ group. If true,
this represents a considerable change in P. and a remarkable achievement by Cicero. Caesar
in his BCiv. 1.4.4-5says nothing about this; he says P. is a willing accomplice because he
wants to maintain his domination. Caesar is probably right. LINTOTT
5 January: Caesar’s letter is read in Senate.
7 January: emergency debate and decree, SCU. Cicero, Fam. 16.11.2 (WALSH 68).
Antonius and Cassius flee with Curio to Caesar.
Caesar wants a personal meeting with P (BCiv. 1.9). Cicero tells us C. was prepared to hand
over Transalpina and Cisalpina to allotted successors Ahenobarbus and Considius Nonianus
and to stand in person for elections IF Pompey went to Spain. Fam. 16.12.3
10 January: Caesar crosses the Rubicon
17 January: Pompey retreats from Rome in face of C’s invasion. Att. 7.10 [= WALSH 69]:
Cicero has left the outskirts of Rome.
LINTOTT: We depend upon Caesar’s Bellum Civile (begins abruptly on 5 Jan.) for the
precipitation of the crisis. Appian and Plut’s Caesar are especially rich at this point. They
may derive from Asinius Pollio, as Korneman suggested in 1896.
13
Plu. Pomp. 58-59 – very detailed; Plu. Caesar 29-30 – no sword; Dio 40.64.1-4 – no vote engineered by Curio
LINTOTT 278
15
**LINTOTT 278
14
20
25 January: P’s council of war sends reply to Caesar. They might agree but C should retire to
his province for the moment. Even Cato wants peace (Att.7.15.2).16
24 February: it was reported that P. was on his way to Brundisium, thence to Greece. Att.
8.8.1-2 [= WALSH 72]
Rechtsfrage
Vast controversy with no clear result among scholars.17 It was equally unclear at the time.
But entering Italy with an army, Caesar made the question irrelevant. His command, legally
valid or not, was not valid for that.
Cicero Att. 7.11.1
‘What’s going on?... Are we talking about a general of the Roman people? or Hannibal?’
16
17
LINTOTT 284-5
WISEMAN 423