#Les Proscriptions de la Rome républicaine.

[garland-on-thy-brow]

Adding the book about proscriptions to my reading list for when I will want to read in French.

[garland-on-thy-brow]

Interestingly, François Hinard (Les proscriptions de la Rome Républicaine 1985, p. 463) proposes the identification between the proscribed Decius of App. BC 4.27 and P. Decius the partisan of Antony. The latter is mentioned in Cic. Phil. 11.13 (has been in debt at some point, had property auctioned; I did not understand the details of the case) and Cic. Phil. 13.27, and can be the same as Decius of App. BC. 3.80 ("Decius also, one of Antony's officers, who had been taken prisoner at Mutina, Octavian treated with honour, allowing him to return to Antony if he wished, and when Decius asked what were his sentiments toward Antony, he said that he had given plenty of indications to persons of discernment and that even more would be insufficient for fools"). Hinard notes that just before learning of his proscription, Decius felt safe enough to attend a senate meeting, which speaks in favour of identifying him with the partisan of Antony.

So like. Cic. Fam 7.23.4 introduces Licinia, sister of a Cassius; there is a house in Rome next to Cicero's that belongs to Cassius and is inhabited by Licinia; Licinia's husband Dexius is gone to Spain.

We are not sure which Cassius owns the house, but we do know from the same letter that he is friends with Nicias, whom Shackleton Bailey identifies as Curtius Nicias of Cos: grammarian, Epicurean, friend and client of Dolabella. Cassius may be our Gaius Cassius Longinus or his younger brother Lucius.

Licinia's husband Dexius is otherwise unattested. It seems an obscure marriage for a half-sister of Cassius, and it needs an explanation. Nevertheless, I am very tempted to bring up Decius, proscribed and killed in 43 bce according to Appian (App. BC 4.27). I suspect they might be the same person.

[Note. Shackleton Bailey: "Manutius proposed Crasso ( i.e. M. Licinius Crassus , son of the ' Triumvir ' ) <;in place of Cassio>". This particular Crassus does not make sense: even if the unattested daughter of the triumvir existed, how likely was she to marry a no-name Dexius while her brothers married the daughters of Metellus Scipio and Metellus Creticus? Furthermore, by Shackleton Bailey's dating of the letter to 46 bce, M. Licinius Crassus the younger is long dead. Some other Crassus might make sense, but I do not think we have a suitable one at the time.]

[garland-on-thy-brow]

Looking through Catalogue des proscrits 43 bce (Hinard 1985, Les proscriptions de la Rome républicaine) like - I know half of the list personally.