Digital Prosopography of the Roman Republic

ANTO1969 C. Antonius (19) M. f. M. n. Hybrida

Status

  • Nobilis Expand

    Cic. Leg. Agr. 2.3.6-7, Cic. Phil. 6.6.17, Q. Cic. Comm. Pet. 7-8, 9, 12, Ascon. Tog. Cand. 82C, 93C

Life Dates

  • 70, expelled from Senate (RE)
  • 59, exiled (Kelly 2006) Expand

    Kelly no. 38, Alexander TLRR no. 241.

  • 44?, restored (Kelly 2006) Expand

    Kelly no. 38. Note: Not restored by Caesar in the mass recall of 49. Still an exile during Antony's domination in 44, unassisted by Antony (Dio 45.47.3-4).

Relationships

son of
M. Antonius (28) M. f. M. n. (cos. 99) (Zmeskal 2009) Expand

Asc. Tog. Cand. 82C, Asc. Tog. Cand. 94C, Cic. Phil. II 98

brother of
? Antonia (109) (daughter of M. Antonius (28) M. f. M. n. (cos. 99)) (DPRR Team)
M. Antonius (29) M. f. Creticus (pr. 74) (Zmeskal 2009) Expand

Cic. Phil. II 56, Cic. Phil. II 70, Strab. X 2.13 (455 C)

father of
Antonia (108) (daughter of C. Antonius (19) M. f. M. n. Hybrida (cos. 63)) (Zmeskal 2009) Expand

Val. Max. IV 2.6

Antonia (110) (daughter of C. Antonius (19) M. f. M. n. Hybrida (cos. 63)) (Zmeskal 2009) Expand

Cic. Phil. II 99

Career

  • Praefectus Equitum 84 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Either in 84 or earlier he committed depredations while Prefect of cavalry in Greece, for which he was later called to account (Ascon. S4C; see 76, Praetor's, on M. Lucullus). (Broughton MRR II)
  • Tribunus Plebis 68 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • 8 This list of at least nine, and perhaps all ten, of the Tribunes of this year is secured by combining the three names preserved in the prescript of the Lex Antonia with the names preserved in CIL 12.2.744, where all or part of all ten names appears. They are all names of Tribunes (see commentary in CIL), except perhaps the fragmentary name of a Curator Viarum, which comes last in the list above. Caesar, probably before his aedileship (Plut. Caes. 5.5), and Minucius Thermus, when a candidate for the consulship undertook curatorships, Caesar of the Appian, and Minucius of the Flaminian, way (Cic. Att. 1.1.2). Volcatius therefore, if his name is correctly restored, could possibly be the Consul of 66. Mommsen however has shown that the Tribunes were concerned with public works in the city (Ges. Schr. 3.27 ff., and comm. on CIL 12.2.744), and interprets no. 751 on the builder of the Pens Fabricius to mean that Fabricius as Curator Viarum was at the same time one of the Tribunes (62 B. C.). The date of this college of Tribunes remains not altogether certain. It is of necessity later than the date mentioned in the Lex Antonia (Apr. 1, 72), and cannot be placed in 69 (see 69, Tribunes), or in the years of the tribunates of Plautius (see 70), or of Lollius Palicanus (see 71). Mommsen's suggestion of 72 would be possible if Tribunes at that time had the right to propose legislation, but Mommsen's chief evidence that they had this right, contrary to what both Cicero (Leg. 3.2.2) and Caesar (BC 1.7.3) imply, seems to be this very law (Str. 2.312, note 1, and 3.158). The law therefore is probably subsequent to the restoration of the powers of the tribunate. By elimination 68 appears to be the most probable year. The date in 72 chosen as a point of reference in the law for the regulation of arrangements with Termessus must be based on a situation in Asia or in Termessus itself during the Third Mithridatic War. Note also that a date in 68 probably reveals a stage in the career of Antonius after his expulsion from the Senate in 70. On the Lex Antonia, see Magic, Roman Rule in Asia Minor, 1.295; 2.1176f., note 34. (Broughton MRR II)
    • p. 257-63 (Thommen 1989)
  • Praetor 66 urbanus?, Rome (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • 2 As in the list of Praetors given in 67, only eight of the nine listed above can have held the praetorship in 66. None can be later; three, Caesonius, Cornificius, and Sulpicius Galba, may be earlier, while the date of Varinius depends upon the correct order of the governors of Asia. (Broughton MRR II)
    • EIected along with Cicero, whose support raised him from last place to third (Cic. Tog. Cand., fr. 5, in Ascon. 85 C, and fr. 26, in Ascon. 92-93 C; Q. Cic. Comm. Pet. 8). His games indicate that he was probably Pr. Urbanus (Cic. Mur. 40; Val. Max. 2.4.5; Plin. NH 33.53; see RE; Hölzl, Fast. Praet. 34; D.-G. 1.391, who suggest that he had been an Aedile). (Broughton MRR II)
    • p. 753, footnote 408 (Brennan 2000)
  • Legatus (Lieutenant) 65 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • 4 The text of the Comm. Pet. at this point reads caupodoces with saupones suprascript. Bücheler offered the emendation Cappadoces, an interesting destination for Antonius at this time, if it were better attested. (Broughton MRR II)
    • A Legatus in 65 (Q. Cic. Comm. Pet. 8). (Broughton MRR II)
  • Consul 63 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • CIL 12.2.750, 907-909; Cic. Cael. 74; Sall. Cat. 24.1; Fast. Amit., Degrassi 170, and see also 131, 490f.; Strabo 10.2.13, 455c; Plin. NH 8.213; Joseph. Ai 14.66; Suet. Aug. 5; Flor. 2.12.5; Die 37, Index, and 10.4; Obseq. 61; Eutrop. 6.15; Chr. 354; Fast. Hyd.; Chr. Paw.; Cassiod.; Schol. Bob. 80 Stangl. The candidacy and election of Antonius are referred to in Cic. Att. 1.1.1.; Q. Cic. Comm. Pet. 8-9; Ascon., on Cic. Tog. Cand., passim, esp. 37, 93-94 C; Plut. Cic. 11. He was allotted Cisalpine Gaul, but re1 Macedonia when Cicero refused to go (Cic. Pis. 5; Fam. 5.5, and cf. Sall. Cat. 26.4; Plut. Cic. 12.4; Dio 37.33.4). He was suspected of involvement in the conspiracy of Catiline (Cic. Sest. 8 and 12, cf. Cat. 3.14; Plut. Cic. 12.1-3; Dio 37.30.3, and 39.3; Schol. Bob. 126 Stangl), but in late October received the command against him in Etruria (Sall. Cat. 36.3; and on the date, Gic. Mur. 84). He joined in carrying a severe law against bribery (Cic. Mur. 3 and 47 and 67 Sest. 133; Vat. 37; Planc. 83; Dio 37.29.1; Schol. Bob. 79, 140, 166 Stangl). Full references to the actions of Cicero in his consulship are in D.-G. 5.449ff.; and the article by Gelzer in RE 7A.865ff. (Broughton MRR II)
    • Cos. 63. In MRR 2.165-166, add that in December 63 he advanced from near Faesulae against Catiline, who was near Pistoria (Sell. Cat. 57.3-5; Sumner, CPh 58, 1963, 215-219). Proconsul in Macedonia, 62-60. The charge against him in his trial in 59 after his return from Macedonia was more probably res repetundae than vis or maiestas (Cic. Vat. 27; Schol. Bob. 94St: see E. S. Gruen, Latomus 32, 1973, 301-310; cf. MRR 2.175). (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proconsul 62 Macedonia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Proconsul (Liv. Per. 103). Early in 62 his army routed that of Catiline, who died on the field (Sall. Cat. 57-61; Liv. Per. 103; Val. Max. 2.8.7; Plut. Cic. 22.5; Flor. 2.12.11-12; Dio 37.39-40; Eutrop. 6.15). His soldiers saluted him as Imperator (Dio; cf. Cic. Fam. 5.5; Obseq. 61 a). He then proceeded to his province of Macedonia, where defeats at the hands of the Dardani and Bastarni, and his own extortions (Cic. Fam. 5.5, and 6; Att. 1.12.1-2, and 16.16; Dio 38.10.1-2; Obseq. 61 a), caused his prosecution for maiestas and for extortion upon his return in 59, and his conviction and exile (Cic. Cael. 74; Flacc. 5 and 95; Dom. 41; Vat. 27-28; Att. 2.2.3; Phil. 2.56 and 98- 99; Strabo 10.2.13, 455c; Val. Max. 4.2.6; Quintil. Inst. Or. 4.2.123-124; 9.3.58; Dio 38.10.1-4; 51.26.5; Schol. Bob. 94 Stangl). See 60, Promagistrates, on C. Octavius. (Broughton MRR II)
    • Cos. 63. In MRR 2.165-166, add that in December 63 he advanced from near Faesulae against Catiline, who was near Pistoria (Sell. Cat. 57.3-5; Sumner, CPh 58, 1963, 215-219). Proconsul in Macedonia, 62-60. The charge against him in his trial in 59 after his return from Macedonia was more probably res repetundae than vis or maiestas (Cic. Vat. 27; Schol. Bob. 94St: see E. S. Gruen, Latomus 32, 1973, 301-310; cf. MRR 2.175). (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proconsul 61 Macedonia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Proconsul in Macedonia (Liv. Per. 103), where he suffered a considerable defeat at the hands of the Thracians (Liv. Per. 103; Dio 38. 10; 51.26.5). See 62, Promagistrates. (Broughton MRR II)
    • Cos. 63. In MRR 2.165-166, add that in December 63 he advanced from near Faesulae against Catiline, who was near Pistoria (Sell. Cat. 57.3-5; Sumner, CPh 58, 1963, 215-219). Proconsul in Macedonia, 62-60. The charge against him in his trial in 59 after his return from Macedonia was more probably res repetundae than vis or maiestas (Cic. Vat. 27; Schol. Bob. 94St: see E. S. Gruen, Latomus 32, 1973, 301-310; cf. MRR 2.175). (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proconsul 60 Macedonia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Proconsul in Macedonia (see 62-61, Promagistrates). Delayed his return to Rome until the end of 60 (Cic. Att. 2.2.3). (Broughton MRR II)
    • Cos. 63. In MRR 2.165-166, add that in December 63 he advanced from near Faesulae against Catiline, who was near Pistoria (Sell. Cat. 57.3-5; Sumner, CPh 58, 1963, 215-219). Proconsul in Macedonia, 62-60. The charge against him in his trial in 59 after his return from Macedonia was more probably res repetundae than vis or maiestas (Cic. Vat. 27; Schol. Bob. 94St: see E. S. Gruen, Latomus 32, 1973, 301-310; cf. MRR 2.175). (Broughton MRR III)
  • Censor 42 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • CIL 14.2611-ILS 6204; Fast. Amit., Degrassi 170f.; Fast. Amer., ibid. 242; Fast. Colot., ibid. 273-275; Fast. Mag. Vic., ibid. 282f.; and see also ibid. 135, 504f. M. Antonius had apparently supported his uncle's candidacy in 44 (Cic. Phil. 2.98). These Censors did not complete the lustrum (Fast. Colot.). (Broughton MRR II)

< Back to results