Senator in 73 (see MRR 2.115). This praenomen, said to have been banned among the patrician Claudii, suggests that he was perhaps father of L. Claudius, rex sacrorum in 57 (21) who had become a member of the college of pontifices ca. 62-60. The name of the preceding rex sacrorum is lost in the lacuna in Macrob. Sat. 3.13.11, but he entered office between 74 and 69. L. R. Taylor (VDRR 203) has suggested that since the succession was often in the same family, there may be here a branch of the patrician Claudii kept for this priesthood which barred one from a further political career. If so, the Claudius listed above owed his place in the Senate and in the consilium of 73, not to a quaestorship but to his priesthood.
(Broughton MRR III)
The list of senators in a dated inscription of this year (SIG(3) 747) provides good evidence for the names of a group of ex-magistrates, although it is not wholly conclusive because of the additions to the Senate by the reforms of Sulla. (Broughton MRR II)
Senator in 73 (see MRR 2.115). This praenomen, said to have been banned among the patrician Claudii, suggests that he was perhaps father of L. Claudius, rex sacrorum in 57 (21) who had become a member of the college of pontifices ca. 62-60. The name of the preceding rex sacrorum is lost in the lacuna in Macrob. Sat. 3.13.11, but he entered office between 74 and 69. L. R. Taylor (VDRR 203) has suggested that since the succession was often in the same family, there may be here a branch of the patrician Claudii kept for this priesthood which barred one from a further political career. If so, the Claudius listed above owed his place in the Senate and in the consilium of 73, not to a quaestorship but to his priesthood.
(Broughton MRR III)