Quaestor
before 107
(Broughton MRR II Appendix 2)
Expand
I. de Delos 4.1.1632, before 100 B. C. (Broughton MRR II Appendix 2)
Pr. 107? Legatus before 100. In MRR 2.482 (cf. 1.551, 552, note 3), refer now to Schleussner, Legaten, 228, no. 80. He is termed legatus in I. de Delos 4.1.1710 (#), but in 4.1.1854 appears as #; cf. ILLRP 358, where Degrassi explains it as praetor pro consule Asiae. He did hold a praetorship, for Cicero claims he would have become consul if the successive consulships of Marius had not removed the opportunity (Brut. 175). F. Papazoglou lists him with Ser. Cornelius Lentulus (208b) (I. de Delos 4.1.1845) and C. Cluvius (2) (ibid. 1679) as possibly governors of Macedonia, but agrees that Asia is possible too (ANR W 2.7.1, 1979, 310-311; see also ZAnt 29, 1979, 227-249).[34x]
(Broughton MRR III)
This man is probably the Billienus who was excluded from the consulship by the series held by Marius (Cic. Brut. 175). If so, his praetorship should be dated about this time. According to I. de Délos 4.1.1710- CIG 2285B he was honored at Delos with the title of Legate, but in CIL 1(2).2.815 he is called a Proconsul. See 106, Promagistrates. (Broughton MRR I)
CIL 1
.2.815; cf. I. de Délos 4.1.1710; Cio. Brut. 175. (Broughton MRR I)
Pr. 107? Legatus before 100. In MRR 2.482 (cf. 1.551, 552, note 3), refer now to Schleussner, Legaten, 228, no. 80. He is termed legatus in I. de Delos 4.1.1710 (#), but in 4.1.1854 appears as #; cf. ILLRP 358, where Degrassi explains it as praetor pro consule Asiae. He did hold a praetorship, for Cicero claims he would have become consul if the successive consulships of Marius had not removed the opportunity (Brut. 175). F. Papazoglou lists him with Ser. Cornelius Lentulus (208b) (I. de Delos 4.1.1845) and C. Cluvius (2) (ibid. 1679) as possibly governors of Macedonia, but agrees that Asia is possible too (ANR W 2.7.1, 1979, 310-311; see also ZAnt 29, 1979, 227-249).[34x]
(Broughton MRR III)
Proconsul (CIL 1
.2.815), probably in Asia. See 107, Praetors and note 3.{554} (Broughton MRR I)
Pr. 107? Legatus before 100. In MRR 2.482 (cf. 1.551, 552, note 3), refer now to Schleussner, Legaten, 228, no. 80. He is termed legatus in I. de Delos 4.1.1710 (#), but in 4.1.1854 appears as #; cf. ILLRP 358, where Degrassi explains it as praetor pro consule Asiae. He did hold a praetorship, for Cicero claims he would have become consul if the successive consulships of Marius had not removed the opportunity (Brut. 175). F. Papazoglou lists him with Ser. Cornelius Lentulus (208b) (I. de Delos 4.1.1845) and C. Cluvius (2) (ibid. 1679) as possibly governors of Macedonia, but agrees that Asia is possible too (ANR W 2.7.1, 1979, 310-311; see also ZAnt 29, 1979, 227-249).[34x]
(Broughton MRR III)
Legatus
before 100
Achaea
(Broughton MRR II Appendix 2)
Expand
I. de Delos 4.1.1710, before 100. (Broughton MRR II Appendix 2)
Pr. 107? Legatus before 100. In MRR 2.482 (cf. 1.551, 552, note 3), refer now to Schleussner, Legaten, 228, no. 80. He is termed legatus in I. de Delos 4.1.1710 (#), but in 4.1.1854 appears as #; cf. ILLRP 358, where Degrassi explains it as praetor pro consule Asiae. He did hold a praetorship, for Cicero claims he would have become consul if the successive consulships of Marius had not removed the opportunity (Brut. 175). F. Papazoglou lists him with Ser. Cornelius Lentulus (208b) (I. de Delos 4.1.1845) and C. Cluvius (2) (ibid. 1679) as possibly governors of Macedonia, but agrees that Asia is possible too (ANR W 2.7.1, 1979, 310-311; see also ZAnt 29, 1979, 227-249).[34x]
(Broughton MRR III)