Digital Prosopography of the Roman Republic

NORB1777 C. Norbanus (5) (Balbus)?

Life Dates

  • 82, proscribed (Hinard 1985) Expand

    Hinard 82 no. 51

  • 82, death - violent (Broughton MRR II) Expand

    Suicide.

Career

  • Tribunus Plebis 103 (Broughton MRR I) Expand
    • The tribunate of Norbanus must be dated in or after 104 B.C. The year 104 is itself improbable for the following reasons: 1. The proceedings against Caepio mentioned above took place in a public trial before the people for the loss of his army, as in the case of Mallius, and not in the extraordinary commission on the gold of Tolosa; and therefore would almost certainly be later than the disabilities imposed in 104 by the Cassian Law (see 104, Tribunes of the Plebs). 2. This action was probably associated with the plebiscito against Mallius, which took place during one of the tribunates of Saturninus and so{566} cannot precede 103 (see above, on Saturninus). 3. The riots described above led to Norbanus' prosecution in 94 B.C. for minuta maiestas under the Lex Appuleia. He could hardly have been accused under this law for offences committed before it existed (see Lengle, Hermes 66 [1931] 302-316, esp. 308ff., who refutes Mommsen's view that Norbanus acted against Caepio under the Lex Appuleia, and distinguishes the fields of this action and the quaestio auri Tolosani), and it cannot have existed before Saturninus' first tribunate in 103. A terminus ante quem in 95 is set by Norbanus' trial in 94. Niccolini (FTP 211f.) follows D.- G. and Klebs (RE) in support of this date, but is then compelled to replace the known Didius, who was Praetor by 101 at the latest and Consul in 98, by an otherwise unknown one who was Tribune in 95, and Antonius' description in his defense of Norbanus of how strong and recent the wrath of the people was at the time of Caepio's trial loses relevance and verisimilitude (Cic. De Or. 2.197-203). These considerations tend to exclude the years between Didius' praetorship, 101 at the latest, and 95; while 102 is also excluded by the probability that Norbanus was then serving as Quaestor under Antonius in Cilicia (see 102, Praetors, and Quaestors; and Broughton, TAPhA 77 [1946] 37, note 14). The tribunate was not yet fixed in the cursus honorum, and had been held by Fulvius in 122 after his consulship, nor is there evidence that the overlapping between patrician and plebeian offices (between Dec. 5 and 10, if a quaestorship beginning Dec. 5 follows a tribunate ending Dec. 10) was expressly forbidden (Mommsen, Str. 1.516f., 551, 553). If so, there is still the possibility that he was Quaestor in 101, a possibility unknown to Münzer and Lengle (see above) who did not know the term of Antonius' command. We are left therefore with 103 as the most probable date for Norbanus' tribunate, and with it for the tribunates of Cotta, Didius, and Reginus, and for the Lex Appuleia de maiestate. (Broughton MRR I)
    • Prosecuted Q. Servilius Caepio before the people for the loss of his army (see 105, Promagistrates), probably in connection with Saturninus' bill against Mallius (see above). Two Tribunes, Didius and Aurelius, who attempted to veto the proceedings were driven off by force, and{564} Aemilius Scaurus was struck on the head with a stone. Caepio was convicted and imprisoned but the Tribune L. Reginus freed him and later went into exile with him at Smyrna. Norbanus was prosecuted in 94 for his part in these proceedings upon a charge of minuta maiestas under the Appuleian law, but was defended by the orator M. Antonius and acquitted (Cic. De Or. 2.107-109, 124, 188, 197-203; Part. Or. 104-105; Off. 2.49; Val. Max. 8.5.2; and on Caepio, Auct. Ad Herenn. 1.24; Cic. Balb. 28; De Or. 2.197-198; Val. Max. 4.7.3; 6.9.13, died in prison; Gran. Lic. 21 B; see note 7). (Broughton MRR I)
    • An extraordinary commission was established to investigate the loss of the treasure of Tolosa (Cic. ND 3.74; Oros. 5.15.25), and secured the conviction of several persons (Dio 26, fr. 90). We do not know whether Caepio was among these or not since our sources (see above, and note 6) show that his exile was due to Norbanus' prosecution before the people, and either action may have included the confiscation of his property which actually took place (Liv. Per. 67; where the excerptor has confused the order and connection of events; Auct. Vir. Ill. 73.5, the funds used for Saturninus' colonial program; cf. Strab. 4.1.13, 188c; Iustin. 32.3.11; Obseq. 44a, mentioning a (former ?) slave of Caepio who was banished from Rome). Lengle (Hermes 66 [1931] 302-316) believes that a jury in 104 or 103 constituted under Caepio's own law, since the Lex Servilia Glauciae is dated in 101, might have sacrificed several of his associates and acquitted him. (Broughton MRR I)
    • p. 257-63 (Thommen 1989)
  • Quaestor 101 Cilicia (Broughton MRR I) Expand
    • Served under M. Antonius against the Cilician pirates (Cic. De Or. 2.197-202; cf. App. BC 1.91; see 103, notes 4 and 7). (Broughton MRR I)
    • Cos. 83. As 103 seems the most probable date for his tribunate (MRR 1.563-564, 565, note 7), ending on December 10 of that year, his quaestorship under M. Antonius, if he served in the war against the Cilician pirates, should best be dated to 101, thus avoiding an overlap in offices, but he . may have been the consul's quaestor in 99. Münzer (Hermes 67, 1932, 220-236) admitted both possibilities but favored the earlier date because Norbanus sought refuge at Rhodes when proscribed by Sulla (Liv. Per. 89; Oros. 5.21.3). Gruen prefers the later date (CPh 61, 1966, 105-106) because the quaestor Gabinius served in Rhodes. A date to 99, as Sumner observes, reduces the interval to his consulship to 16 years. See Badian, Studies 343ff. and 230; AJPh 104, 1983, 156-171. The dates in MRR for his praetorship and his promagistracy in Africa (MRR 2.41, note 3, 88 and 87) should be revised at least to 89 and 88-87, since, according to Diodorus (37.2.13) and Cicero ( Verr. 2.3.117, 2.5.8), he held command there during the Social War. See Badian, Studies 84-86. He may have remained into the period of Cinna's consulships.[149] (Broughton MRR III)
  • Praetor before 90 Sicilia (Brennan 2000) Expand
    • 3 Norbanus' cognomen remains doubtful (see Degrassi 130) since his connection with L. Norbanus Balbus, Cos. 19, is quite uncertain. The reading of Chr. 354 on his consulship in 83 is Pulbo. He probably held command in Sicily in 88 and 87 (Diod.). See Münzer, Hermes 67 (1932) 231-235. (Broughton MRR II)
    • Governor of Sicily which he kept at peace and untouched by the Social War (Cic. Verr. 2.3.117, and 5.8; Diod. 37.2.13-14, #; cf. C,rueber, CRRBM 1.347f.; SEG 1.418). (Broughton MRR II)
    • Cos. 83. As 103 seems the most probable date for his tribunate (MRR 1.563-564, 565, note 7), ending on December 10 of that year, his quaestorship under M. Antonius, if he served in the war against the Cilician pirates, should best be dated to 101, thus avoiding an overlap in offices, but he . may have been the consul's quaestor in 99. Münzer (Hermes 67, 1932, 220-236) admitted both possibilities but favored the earlier date because Norbanus sought refuge at Rhodes when proscribed by Sulla (Liv. Per. 89; Oros. 5.21.3). Gruen prefers the later date (CPh 61, 1966, 105-106) because the quaestor Gabinius served in Rhodes. A date to 99, as Sumner observes, reduces the interval to his consulship to 16 years. See Badian, Studies 343ff. and 230; AJPh 104, 1983, 156-171. The dates in MRR for his praetorship and his promagistracy in Africa (MRR 2.41, note 3, 88 and 87) should be revised at least to 89 and 88-87, since, according to Diodorus (37.2.13) and Cicero ( Verr. 2.3.117, 2.5.8), he held command there during the Social War. See Badian, Studies 84-86. He may have remained into the period of Cinna's consulships.[149] (Broughton MRR III)
    • p. 747, footnote 270 (Brennan 2000)
  • Promagistrate? 88 Sicilia (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • Governor of Sicily (see 88, Praetors; Cic. Verr. 2.3.117). He kept Italiote forces out and himself captured Rhegium (Cic. Verr. 2.5.8; Diod. 37.2.13-14; cf. Grueber, CRRBM 1.347f.; SEG 1.418). (Broughton MRR II)
    • Cos. 83. As 103 seems the most probable date for his tribunate (MRR 1.563-564, 565, note 7), ending on December 10 of that year, his quaestorship under M. Antonius, if he served in the war against the Cilician pirates, should best be dated to 101, thus avoiding an overlap in offices, but he . may have been the consul's quaestor in 99. Münzer (Hermes 67, 1932, 220-236) admitted both possibilities but favored the earlier date because Norbanus sought refuge at Rhodes when proscribed by Sulla (Liv. Per. 89; Oros. 5.21.3). Gruen prefers the later date (CPh 61, 1966, 105-106) because the quaestor Gabinius served in Rhodes. A date to 99, as Sumner observes, reduces the interval to his consulship to 16 years. See Badian, Studies 343ff. and 230; AJPh 104, 1983, 156-171. The dates in MRR for his praetorship and his promagistracy in Africa (MRR 2.41, note 3, 88 and 87) should be revised at least to 89 and 88-87, since, according to Diodorus (37.2.13) and Cicero ( Verr. 2.3.117, 2.5.8), he held command there during the Social War. See Badian, Studies 84-86. He may have remained into the period of Cinna's consulships.[149] (Broughton MRR III)
  • Promagistrate? 87 Sicilia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Governor of Sicily (see 88, Praetors; Cic. Verr. 2.3.117). He kept Italiote forces out and himself captured Rhegium (Cic. Verr. 2.5.8; Diod. 37.2.13-14; cf. Grueber, CRRBM 1.347f.; SEG 1.418). (Broughton MRR II)
    • Cos. 83. As 103 seems the most probable date for his tribunate (MRR 1.563-564, 565, note 7), ending on December 10 of that year, his quaestorship under M. Antonius, if he served in the war against the Cilician pirates, should best be dated to 101, thus avoiding an overlap in offices, but he . may have been the consul's quaestor in 99. Münzer (Hermes 67, 1932, 220-236) admitted both possibilities but favored the earlier date because Norbanus sought refuge at Rhodes when proscribed by Sulla (Liv. Per. 89; Oros. 5.21.3). Gruen prefers the later date (CPh 61, 1966, 105-106) because the quaestor Gabinius served in Rhodes. A date to 99, as Sumner observes, reduces the interval to his consulship to 16 years. See Badian, Studies 343ff. and 230; AJPh 104, 1983, 156-171. The dates in MRR for his praetorship and his promagistracy in Africa (MRR 2.41, note 3, 88 and 87) should be revised at least to 89 and 88-87, since, according to Diodorus (37.2.13) and Cicero ( Verr. 2.3.117, 2.5.8), he held command there during the Social War. See Badian, Studies 84-86. He may have remained into the period of Cinna's consulships.[149] (Broughton MRR III)
  • Consul 83 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Cic. Quinct. 24; Fast. Cap., Degrassi 54f., 130, 484f.; Tac. Hist. 3.72; App. BC 1.82; Flor. 2.9.18; Obseq. 57; Eutrop. 5.7; Chr. 354 (Asiatico II et Pulbo); Fast. Hyd. (Scipione et Narbone), so also Chr. Pasc.; Cassiod.; and on Scipio, Cic. Verr. 2.1.37. (Broughton MRR II)
  • Promagistrate 82 Sicilia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Probably a Proconsul. He was routed by Metellus at Faventia in Cisalpine Gaul, and thereafter escaped the treachery of Albinovanus (see Legates), and made his way to Rhodes, where he committed suicide (App. BC 1.91, and 94, and 96; Oros. 5.20.7, and 21.8; cf. Liv. Per. 89; Vell. 2.28.1). (Broughton MRR II)

< Back to results