CALP2164 C. Calpurnius (63) -. f. Cn. or Q.? n. Piso

Status

  • Nobilis Expand

    Schol. Bob. Sest. 139 Stangl

Life Dates

  • 110?, birth (Sumner Orators) Expand

    Sumner R181.

Relationships

grandson of
? Q. Calpurnius (86) C. f. C. n. Piso (cos. 135) (Badian 1990)
? Cn. Calpurnius (73) Piso (cos. 139) (Badian 1990)

Career

  • Praetor 71 urbanus, Rome (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • 2 The latest year possible under the Cornelian law. (Broughton MRR II)
    • Val. Max. 7.7.5. (Broughton MRR II)
    • Cos. 67. Praetor 71. As he is termed praetor urbis in Val. Max. 7.7.5 in connection with business about an inheritance definitely within the province of the pr. urb., it seems preferable to date his office a year earlier to 71 (cf. MRR 2.127), since in 70 M. Mummius (9) received communications from Sicily more suitable for a pr. urb. than a pr. pereg. (MRR 2.127; R. Seager, CR 20, 1970, 11; Sumner, Orators 128). Proconsul in both Gallic provinces in 66 and 65 (Larsen, CPh 26, 1931, 427-428; MRR 2.154, 159), he may have continued in charge of the Cisalpina in 64 and perhaps even into 63, as Murena was governor only of Transalpine Gaul (MRR 2.163, 169), and no successor in Cisalpina is named before Metellus Celer (86). Cos. 60, in 63 (MRR 2.166). On the governors of the Gallic provinces, see Badian, Mel. Piganiol 901ff., esp. 913-917. Caesar's prosecution of him is not certainly dated (Cic. Flacc. 98; Sall. Cat. 49.2). See Badian, Mel. Piganiol 913-916; cf. W. Allen, Jr., TAPhA 83, 1952, 233ff.; CPh 48, 1953, 176f. Addendum. As he held the office of praetor urbanus, B. W. Frier (TAPhA 113, 1983, 224-225, 229) would date it to 72, not 71 as suggested above, thus leaving room to place the urban praetorship of L. Caecilius C. f. Q. n. Metellus (74). Cos. 68, in 71, the probable date of his grant of action for damnum vi hominibus armatis coactisve datum. (Broughton MRR III)
    • p. 752, footnote 385 (Brennan 2000)
  • Consul 67 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • CIL 12.2.748, 2511; Cic. Phil. 2.12; Dio 36.12. 1, and 24.3; Chr. 354 (Pisone et Glabria); Fast. Hyd. (Pisone et Glabrione), so also Chr. Pasc.; Cassiod.; on Piso, Ascon. 57 C; and on Glabrio, CIL 12.2.959; Dio 36.41.2. See Degrassi 131, 488f. Piso was strongly opposed to the proposals of the Tribune Gabinius (Dio 36.24.3; cf. Plut. Pomp. 25.4), to the recruitment of forces for Pompey (Dio 36.37.2-3; Plut. Pomp. 27.1), and the proposals of the Tribune Cornelius (Ascon. 58 C; Dio 36.38-39), and to counter the latter was compelled to carry a bribery law of his own (Cic. Corn. 1, fr. 23, and 45; Mur. 46 and 67 and 72-73; Tog. Cand. in Ascon. 88 C; Sall. Cat. 18.2; Ascon. 69, 75, 88 C; Dio 36.38-39; Schol. Bob. 78 Stangl; cf. Cic. Sull. 74). He was assigned the province of Transalpine Gaul during his consulship (Dio 36.37.2-3), and also the Cisalpine province (Cic. Att. 1.1.2; cf. Flacc. 98; Sall. Cat. 49.2; see Larsen, CPh 26 [1931] 427-429). He stopped Lollius Palicanus from his candidacy for the consulship (Val. Max. 3.8.3; cf. Cic. Att. 1.1.1). Glabrio supported his colleague's bribery law (Dio 36.38. 1), and under a law of Gabinius received command of Bithynia and Pontus (Cic. Leg. Man. 5 and 26; Sall. Hist. 5.13 M, Lex Gabinia; Dio 36.14.4, and 17.1; cf. App. Mith. 90, Asia; Eutrop. 6.9.3; Schol. Gron. 319 Stangl). (Broughton MRR II)
  • Proconsul 66 Gallia Cisalpina, Gallia Transalpina (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Continued in command of Cisalpine and of Transalpine Gaul (see 67, Consuls), and subdued a rising of the Allobroges (Cic. Att. 1.13.2, cf. 1.1.2; Dio 36.37.2). (Broughton MRR II)
    • Cos. 67. Praetor 71. As he is termed praetor urbis in Val. Max. 7.7.5 in connection with business about an inheritance definitely within the province of the pr. urb., it seems preferable to date his office a year earlier to 71 (cf. MRR 2.127), since in 70 M. Mummius (9) received communications from Sicily more suitable for a pr. urb. than a pr. pereg. (MRR 2.127; R. Seager, CR 20, 1970, 11; Sumner, Orators 128). Proconsul in both Gallic provinces in 66 and 65 (Larsen, CPh 26, 1931, 427-428; MRR 2.154, 159), he may have continued in charge of the Cisalpina in 64 and perhaps even into 63, as Murena was governor only of Transalpine Gaul (MRR 2.163, 169), and no successor in Cisalpina is named before Metellus Celer (86). Cos. 60, in 63 (MRR 2.166). On the governors of the Gallic provinces, see Badian, Mel. Piganiol 901ff., esp. 913-917. Caesar's prosecution of him is not certainly dated (Cic. Flacc. 98; Sall. Cat. 49.2). See Badian, Mel. Piganiol 913-916; cf. W. Allen, Jr., TAPhA 83, 1952, 233ff.; CPh 48, 1953, 176f. Addendum. As he held the office of praetor urbanus, B. W. Frier (TAPhA 113, 1983, 224-225, 229) would date it to 72, not 71 as suggested above, thus leaving room to place the urban praetorship of L. Caecilius C. f. Q. n. Metellus (74). Cos. 68, in 71, the probable date of his grant of action for damnum vi hominibus armatis coactisve datum. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proconsul 65 Gallia Cisalpina, Gallia Transalpina (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • Continued as Proconsul in command of both Transalpine and Cisalpine Gaul (Cic. Att. 1.1.2; see 67, Consuls, and 66, Promagistrates). In 63 he was accused of extortion for punishments he imposed on a Transpadane (Cic. Flacc. 98; Sall. Cat. 49.2). (Broughton MRR II)
    • Cos. 67. Praetor 71. As he is termed praetor urbis in Val. Max. 7.7.5 in connection with business about an inheritance definitely within the province of the pr. urb., it seems preferable to date his office a year earlier to 71 (cf. MRR 2.127), since in 70 M. Mummius (9) received communications from Sicily more suitable for a pr. urb. than a pr. pereg. (MRR 2.127; R. Seager, CR 20, 1970, 11; Sumner, Orators 128). Proconsul in both Gallic provinces in 66 and 65 (Larsen, CPh 26, 1931, 427-428; MRR 2.154, 159), he may have continued in charge of the Cisalpina in 64 and perhaps even into 63, as Murena was governor only of Transalpine Gaul (MRR 2.163, 169), and no successor in Cisalpina is named before Metellus Celer (86). Cos. 60, in 63 (MRR 2.166). On the governors of the Gallic provinces, see Badian, Mel. Piganiol 901ff., esp. 913-917. Caesar's prosecution of him is not certainly dated (Cic. Flacc. 98; Sall. Cat. 49.2). See Badian, Mel. Piganiol 913-916; cf. W. Allen, Jr., TAPhA 83, 1952, 233ff.; CPh 48, 1953, 176f. Addendum. As he held the office of praetor urbanus, B. W. Frier (TAPhA 113, 1983, 224-225, 229) would date it to 72, not 71 as suggested above, thus leaving room to place the urban praetorship of L. Caecilius C. f. Q. n. Metellus (74). Cos. 68, in 71, the probable date of his grant of action for damnum vi hominibus armatis coactisve datum. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proconsul? 64 Gallia Cisalpina (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • Cos. 67. Praetor 71. As he is termed praetor urbis in Val. Max. 7.7.5 in connection with business about an inheritance definitely within the province of the pr. urb., it seems preferable to date his office a year earlier to 71 (cf. MRR 2.127), since in 70 M. Mummius (9) received communications from Sicily more suitable for a pr. urb. than a pr. pereg. (MRR 2.127; R. Seager, CR 20, 1970, 11; Sumner, Orators 128). Proconsul in both Gallic provinces in 66 and 65 (Larsen, CPh 26, 1931, 427-428; MRR 2.154, 159), he may have continued in charge of the Cisalpina in 64 and perhaps even into 63, as Murena was governor only of Transalpine Gaul (MRR 2.163, 169), and no successor in Cisalpina is named before Metellus Celer (86). Cos. 60, in 63 (MRR 2.166). On the governors of the Gallic provinces, see Badian, Mel. Piganiol 901ff., esp. 913-917. Caesar's prosecution of him is not certainly dated (Cic. Flacc. 98; Sall. Cat. 49.2). See Badian, Mel. Piganiol 913-916; cf. W. Allen, Jr., TAPhA 83, 1952, 233ff.; CPh 48, 1953, 176f. Addendum. As he held the office of praetor urbanus, B. W. Frier (TAPhA 113, 1983, 224-225, 229) would date it to 72, not 71 as suggested above, thus leaving room to place the urban praetorship of L. Caecilius C. f. Q. n. Metellus (74). Cos. 68, in 71, the probable date of his grant of action for damnum vi hominibus armatis coactisve datum. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proconsul? 63 Gallia Cisalpina (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • Cos. 67. Praetor 71. As he is termed praetor urbis in Val. Max. 7.7.5 in connection with business about an inheritance definitely within the province of the pr. urb., it seems preferable to date his office a year earlier to 71 (cf. MRR 2.127), since in 70 M. Mummius (9) received communications from Sicily more suitable for a pr. urb. than a pr. pereg. (MRR 2.127; R. Seager, CR 20, 1970, 11; Sumner, Orators 128). Proconsul in both Gallic provinces in 66 and 65 (Larsen, CPh 26, 1931, 427-428; MRR 2.154, 159), he may have continued in charge of the Cisalpina in 64 and perhaps even into 63, as Murena was governor only of Transalpine Gaul (MRR 2.163, 169), and no successor in Cisalpina is named before Metellus Celer (86). Cos. 60, in 63 (MRR 2.166). On the governors of the Gallic provinces, see Badian, Mel. Piganiol 901ff., esp. 913-917. Caesar's prosecution of him is not certainly dated (Cic. Flacc. 98; Sall. Cat. 49.2). See Badian, Mel. Piganiol 913-916; cf. W. Allen, Jr., TAPhA 83, 1952, 233ff.; CPh 48, 1953, 176f. Addendum. As he held the office of praetor urbanus, B. W. Frier (TAPhA 113, 1983, 224-225, 229) would date it to 72, not 71 as suggested above, thus leaving room to place the urban praetorship of L. Caecilius C. f. Q. n. Metellus (74). Cos. 68, in 71, the probable date of his grant of action for damnum vi hominibus armatis coactisve datum. (Broughton MRR III)