Scipion processes

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Scipion Trials were attacks on Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus and his younger brother Lucius Cornelius Scipio Asiaticus before the Senate . It is unclear whether only once in 187 BC Charges were brought against them or 187 BC. BC Scipio Asiaticus and 184 BC BC Scipio Africanus was tried. The attacks on the Scipions came from two tribunes , which were supported by the elder Cato . Their reason was the money that Scipio Asiaticus from the Seleucid Antiochus III. had received.

Source problem

Sources are Polybius - who is mostly considered a reliable author - and the older annalistic tradition. This is represented by Aulus Gellius , who relies on Cornelius Nepos , Marcus Tullius Cicero and Titus Livius . The latter reports the most detailed of the events, but relies on the controversial Valerius Antias .

Probable expiry

The probable sequence of events was therefore this: Two tribunes named Quintus Petillius , who had been instigated by Cato, asked Scipio Asiaticus to answer questions about 500 talents in Asia from Antiochus III in 187 . got.

The question was whether the money from Antiochus, of which Scipio had not put 500 talents in the treasury, was praeda or manubiae. In addition, the general had probably used the money to double the soldiers' wages without discussing this. There were also several other reasons for the trials, as Livy tells us. This happened in connection with a negotiation over the triumph of Manlius Vulso , in which Cato appeared as a witness. After Glabrio dropped his candidacy, the legal prosecution of Glabrio was given up. The aforementioned money was the focus of the trial against Asiagenes.

The defendant's brother appeared quite arrogant at the trial and did little to clear up what had happened, but instead ensured that there was a trial before the people. In the following, Scipio Asiaticus was to pay a heavy fine and - since he refused to pay - go to prison. This was prevented by the fact that the tribune Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus intervened. In the year 184 there was then perhaps in connection with the censor elections, in which Scipio Asiaticus was also a candidate, the trial of Scipio Africanus. Gruen also argues that the proceedings against Africanus were not a separate offense, but that he was also charged in the course of the trial against his brother. The rationale for the year 184 was based on the prosecutor Marcus Naevius, who was the tribune in 184. However, his actual participation in the process is questionable. The only valid clue for the year 184 thus collapses. Finally, Plutarch and Polybios do not report any trial against their older brother either. The latest source - the Byzantine Johannes Zonaras - gives us the information that Scipio Asiaticus and Scipio Africanus were condemned together. He triumphed, but withdrew into his private life after the trial was over. The knight's horse had been taken from his brother.

Possible reasons for the processes

Due to the different statements of the sources, it is difficult to name the reasons for the processes. The campaign tactics were arguably an important aspect. Possible further reasons for the process can include conflicts of interest of individual groups in the Senate in connection with the election of the censor in 184 BC. BC, Cato's personal enmity or social conflicts within the nobility against overly ambitious and powerful leaders.

It could be that the charges of 187 were a prelude to the censor elections for 184. The Scipionic opponents should be slowed down. Because in addition to Cato, Marcus Acilius Glabrio was also a candidate for censorship . After all, luck was on Cato's side. It cannot be definitively determined whether the trial against the Scipions was conscious and originated with him. However, it seems understandable that he benefited from the great general's loss of image. It should be noted, however, that it cannot be clearly clarified whether the attack actually took place in the run-up to the election, as the dating is not certain. The fact that Glabrio withdrew his candidacy seems to indicate that the campaign strategy played an important role.

McDonald believes that Cato played a crucial role. This had already started in 190 to turn against Africanus. Werner Schur advocates both the important role of Cato and the crucial role of nobility. He is of the opinion that in the run-up to the censor election of 189, the two candidates who were supporters of the Scipions, Scipio Nasica and Acilius Glabrio , had the best prospects. Cato and his friend Valerius Flaccus would have had much less chance against it. Cato would then have discovered the possibility of an election campaign. Glabrio had been prosecuted before the people by tribunes who were friends with Cato because he had embezzled booty. Glabrio then withdrew his candidacy. But the fellow candidate Glabrios - Scipio Nasica - was also affected. Cato also failed and the middle group was the winner.

After Scipio Africanus returned to Rome in 195, his position of power was shattered . His supporters were also pushed back in their respective positions. Thereupon the Scipions tried to suspect the two favorites of the opposing party in their conduct of office in election 187 and to prove that they had abused official authority . But then there was a new attack by Cato. This had instigated the tribunes to demand an account of funds from the war against Antiochus from Scipio Asiaticus. In 185 he also instigated someone to initiate a lawsuit against a scipion. This time Naevius turned against Scipio Africanus.

When he was able to avert the allegations by referring to the anniversary, Cato launched a new attack against his brother. According to Astin and Gelzer, Cato is also behind the loss of Scipio Asiaticus' knight horse. Gruen assumes, however, that the attacks against the two brothers were not purely the politics of different factions. This is made clear by the fact that Manlius Vulso was also accused in the trial against Asiagenus.

The justification that the processes took place because of the action against too ambitious and powerful leaders, also finds several supporters. Harris believes Scipio ended his career in part because of his unwillingness to accept the role of the mighty. The Senate had dropped the matter against its chairman. But Scipio's appearance before the Senate must be seen as a very self-confident one. After all, he is said to have said that it was not up to anyone to demand an account of the money from him, the great general (Polybios 23,14,3). This must have been viewed as a major affront. So it seems understandable that the senators felt at least attacked. Or perhaps they only saw their power endangered and hoped that the events of 187 would keep this popular and powerful general in check. But the general's behavior can also be seen as a reaction. After all, the Scipions had been held accountable for their actions in Asia. Apparently, however, her behavior was not an isolated incident, rather her case was probably the one that was supposed to serve as an example. Thus the often criticized overreaction of the Scipio Africanus could also be seen as defensive behavior against the treatment by the nobility. If this interpretation is allowed, then the next step seems logical. Gruen sees the events of 187 - for he is of the opinion that the trial of Scipio was part of the proceedings against the younger brother - as part of a series of attempts to determine the limits of the power of generals. So the spoils of war should be negotiated so that the regulations in this regard were less arbitrary. Gruen sees these efforts as an attempt to reduce or at least alleviate the tensions that would have ruled among the elites within the Roman Empire.

swell

  • Appian : Histoire Romaine. Tome IV. Livre VIII. Le livre africain . Edited and translated by Paul Goukowsky. Paris 2002.
  • Aulus Gellius : The Attic Nights. First volume. I. – VIII. Book . Translated by Fritz Weiss. Unchanged reprographic reprint of the Leipzig 1875 edition, Darmstadt 1975.
  • Titus Livius : Roman History. Book XXXV – XXXVIII . Edited and translated by Hans Jürgen Hillen. Munich 1982.
  • Plutarch : Great Greeks and Romans. Volume 1 . Edited and introduced by Konrat Ziegler. Zurich 1954.
  • Polybios : history. Complete edition in two volumes. Second volume . Introduced and transferred by Hans Drexler. Zurich.
  • Valerius Maximus : Memorable Doings and Sayings . Edited and translated by DR Shackleton Bailey. London 2000.

literature

  • Alan E. Astin: Cato the Censor . Oxford University Press, Oxford 1978, ISBN 0-19-814809-7 .
  • JPVD Baldson: L. Cornelius Scipio. A salvage operation . In: Historia 21, 1972, pp. 224-234.
  • Matthias Gelzer : The Nobility of the Roman Republic . 2nd edition, Teubner, Stuttgart 1983, ISBN 3-519-07409-5 .
  • Erich S. Gruen : The "Fall" ot the Scipios . In: Leaders and Masses in the Roman World. Studies in the Honor of Zwi Yavetz . Leiden 1995, pp. 59-80 ( Mnemosyne , Supplement 139).
  • William V. Harris: War and Imperialism in Republican Rome. 327-70 BC . Clarendon Press, Oxford 1979, ISBN 0-19-814827-5 .
  • Dietmar Kienast : Cato the censor. His personality and his time . Bibliographically extended reprint, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1979, ISBN 3-534-07146-8 .
  • AH McDonald: Scipio Africanus and Roman Politics in the Second Century BC . In: Journal of Roman Studies 38, 1938, pp. 153-164.
  • Werner Schur : Scipio Africanus and the establishment of Roman world domination . Dieterich, Leipzig 1927.
  • Howard Hayes Scullard : Scipio Africanus. Soldier and politician . Thames & Hudson, London 1970, ISBN 0-500-40012-1 .
  • Howard Hayes Scullard: Roman Politics 220-150 BC . 2nd edition, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1973, ISBN 0-19-814816-X .
  • Renate Stolle: Ambitus et Invidia . Peter Lang, Frankfurt 1999, ISBN 3-631-34596-8 .

Remarks

  1. ↑ See Scullard, Roman Politics, p. 290.
  2. ↑ Actually, it was a total of 15,000 talents, who with Antiochus III. had been negotiated. Of these, 500 talents were to be paid immediately, 2,500 talents - which his successor Manlius Vulso received, but which may also have been negotiated in connection with the scipion trials - after the ratification of the treaty and the rest in 12 annual installments. See Scullard, Roman Politics, p. 292.
  3. ↑ See Renate Stolle, Ambitus and Invidia, p. 52.
  4. ↑ This question cannot be answered clearly or objectively, even on the basis of the sources. Scipio probably thought that money was praeda, but that doesn't mean that his contemporaries saw it that way. See Scullard, Politics, p. 293.
  5. ↑ Gruen, however, is of the opinion that reasons are given that date from the time of the second Punic War. He concludes that the prosecutors probably simply threw in every damaging item they could discover in addition to the formal change (Gruen, Fall, p. 82). He considers mismanagement or misappropriation (Gruen, p. 86) to be the actual reasons .
  6. ↑ See Gruen, Fall, pp. 71, 75.
  7. ↑ See Gruen, Fall, p. 72.
  8. ↑ Officially, Scipio Asiaticus was supposed to answer questions, but the attack was actually aimed at his older brother, who understood it that way. Cf. Scullard, Politics, p. 292. If one relies on Valerius Maximus as the source, it is possible that the trial against the older brother was associated with the trial against the younger.
  9. ↑ However, it is not entirely clear whether this was really a stand-alone process. Scullard is of the opinion that it could also be an incident that was part of the trial against the younger brother. See Scullard. Politics. P. 293.
  10. ↑ See Gruen, Fall, pp. 78ff., 82ff.
  11. ↑ See Gruen, Fall, pp. 83ff.
  12. ↑ See Gruen, Case p. 88f.
  13. ↑ See Stolle, Ambitus, p. 53.
  14. ↑ See Stolle, Ambitus, p. 53.
  15. ↑ Cf. Astin, Cato the Censor, p. 93, who, however, is of the opinion that there is very little evidence for this thesis.
  16. ↑ Cf. Scullard, Politics, p. 150, who, however, considers it less likely that Cato - motivated by the successful election result for him - launched the attack against Scipio Africanus.
  17. ↑ See McDonald, Scipio, p. 161.
  18. ↑ Schur, Scipio Africanus and the establishment of the Roman world domination, p. 90; see. also Scullard, Scipio, p. 217.
  19. ↑ See Baldson, Scipio, p. 232.
  20. ↑ McDonald, Scipio, p. 162.
  21. ↑ Schur, Scipio, p. 90.
  22. ↑ Schur, Scipio, p. 91.
  23. ↑ See Scullard, Politics, p. 142.
  24. ↑ See Sculluard, Politics, p. 93.
  25. ↑ See ibid. P. 94; even if, according to Gruen, one assumes that there was only one trial against the two brothers, this argument is entirely understandable.
  26. ↑ Cf. Astin, Cato, p. 72f., Who points out, however, that one cannot assume a deep feud as the sole motive and M. Gelzer, Die Nobilität der Roman Republik, p. 106.
  27. ↑ See Gruen, Fall, p. 75.
  28. ^ Harris, War and Imperialism in Republican Rome. McDonald also emphasizes the general's intransigence: McDonald, Scipio, p. 162.
  29. ↑ See Scullard, Scipio, p. 172.
  30. ↑ Cf. Kienast, Cato, p. 66. Certainly some senators were at least jealous that Scipio could behave in this way, cf. Scullard, Politics, 142.
  31. ↑ See Gruen, Fall, p. 79.
  32. ↑ Gruen, Fall, p. 87.
  33. ↑ See Gruen, Fall, p. 89.