Digital Prosopography of the Roman Republic

FANN2340 C. Fannius (9) C. f.

Life Dates

  • 99?, birth (Rüpke 2005)
  • 43, proscribed (Hinard 1985) Expand

    Hinard 43 no. 54

Relationships

son of
? Laelia (26) (daughter of C. Laelius (3) C. f. C. n. Men. Sapiens (cos. 140)) (DPRR Team)
C. Fannius (7) M. f. (C.? n.) (cos. 122) (Zmeskal 2009) Expand

Cic. Q. Fr. 3.5.1, Cic. Att. 4.16.2, Cic. Rep. 1.18, Cic. Brut. 101, Cic. Lael. 1, Cic. Lael. 26, Quintil. Inst. 7.9.12, App. Ib. 67 (287)

? C. Fannius (8) C. f. (pr. before 81) (Brennan 2000)
brother of
? C. Fannius (8) C. f. (pr. before 81) (DPRR Team)

Career

  • Pontifex? 62 to 58 (Rüpke 2005) Expand
    • The successors to P. Mucius Scaevola, Sex. Quinctilius Varus, Mam. Aemilius Lepidus, D. Iunius Silanus and Q. Latatius Catulus were C. Fannius, M. Aemilius Lepidus, P. Cornelius Lentulus SPinther, M. Aemilius Scaurus, M. Licinius Crassus Dives, M. Licinius Crassus and C. Scribonius Curio. These lists of the Pontifices who died between the death of Metellus Pius in 64 or 63 (see 63, Pontifices) and that of Catulus (before May, 60, Cic. Att. 1.20.3; Dio 37.46.3-4), and of their successors, are based on the order of the lists of priests in Macrob. Sat. 3.13.11 (before 6913.C.) and in Cicero (Har. Resp. 12; Dom. 118; in 57 B.C.), and assume that in both cases they are named in the order of their inauguration into the college. The lower limit is drawn on the assumption that the two plebeians, Crassus, whether he be the Consul of 70 or his son, and Curio, are probably the successors of the two plebeians Silanus and Catulus. As the earlier list is not complete there is room for an additional name in the list of successors. On the whole question, see L. R. Taylor, AJPh 63 (1942) 384-412, esp. 388ff., and 411f. (Broughton MRR II)
    • The full list of the college of Pontifices, including the Flamen Martialis and the Flamen Quirinalis (no Flamen Dialis had been inaugurated since the death of Merula in 87) and the Pontifices Minores, as it was composed on September 29, 57, can be reconstructed from Cic. Har. Resp. 12: (Broughton MRR II)
  • Tribunus Plebis 59 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • One of the three Tribunes who opposed Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus (Cic. Sest. 113; Vat. 16; Dio 38.6.1; Schol. Bob. 135, 146f. Stangl). (Broughton MRR II)
    • p. 257-63 (Thommen 1989)
  • Pontifex 57 to after 35 (Rüpke 2005)
  • Praetor before 49 (Brennan 2000) Expand
    • 2 On Aelius Tubero, Cotta (perhaps but not certainly referred to in QF 3.8.6, where Ms reading Gutta is emended to Cotta, as a possible candidate for the consulship of 52), and Postumius, see Hölzl 66f., Stella Maranca 332; and Wehrmarm 68, on Domitius, 71, on Cotta and Tubero, and 72, on Fannius. Nonius Sufenas, Fannius, Voconius, and Sestius are named in Cic. Att. 8.15.3, all with imperium in March of 49, and Postumius was in February directed to succeed Furfanius in Sicily (Att. 7.15.2). On Postumius, who was temporarily prominent between 51 and 49, see Sall. Ad Caes. 2.9.4, now dated with probability by Carlson to 51 B. C. (Eine Denkschrift an Caesar 4ber den Staat [Lund, 1936] 12-26). (Broughton MRR II)
    • See Cic. Sest. 113-114; Vat. 38; Schol. Bob. 135 Stangl. (Broughton MRR II)
    • The appearance of the members of this group as Promagistrates in various provinces and commands in 49 after the passage of Pompey's law making mandatory an interval of five years between the city magistracy and the provincial command, suggests that they had held the praetorship by or before 54 B. C. Fannius at least had good prospects of attaining the praetorship when he was referred to in 56 (see above). It is not clear how far the emergency caused exemptions from the law in 49, nor does it appear to have applied to the magistrates in office in 52. (Broughton MRR II)
    • On his possible praetorship, see MRR 2.222. Sumner points out. that it is not fully attested[89x] (Orators 145). Promagistrate in Asia, 49-48 (MRR 2.262). The cistophori he issued in Asia give his filiation, C. f., and confirm that he was a pontifex (Pont) while the legend PR may stand for pr(o praetore). On his coinage, see also J. M. Cody, AJA 77, 1973, 43-50. His title is given in Joseph. (AJ 14.230) as # (MSS #) and also (14.233), quite strangely, as #. Cicero's mention of him in November 48 (Att. 11.6.6, November 27) between the names of Pompey and of Lentulus Spinther, who had died, suggests that he too had been reported dead. Perhaps the report was mistaken, a solution Cadoux prefers, since the legatus of 43 and 42 with the same name appears as an envoy with persons of considerable seniority (MRR 2.351), and the legatus of 42 (2.365) continues in Sextus Pompey's entourage as a person of rank (App. BC 5.139). (TJC) The third place on a legation, however, often went to a younger man, so it remains possible that this legatus was not C. Fannius (9). (Broughton MRR III)
    • p. 750, footnote 341 (Brennan 2000)
  • Propraetor 49 Sicilia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Probably a Propraetor. He was originally sent to Sicily in advance of Cato (Cic. Att. 7.15.3; 8.15.3, cum (Broughton MRR II)
    • On his possible praetorship, see MRR 2.222. Sumner points out. that it is not fully attested[89x] (Orators 145). Promagistrate in Asia, 49-48 (MRR 2.262). The cistophori he issued in Asia give his filiation, C. f., and confirm that he was a pontifex (Pont) while the legend PR may stand for pr(o praetore). On his coinage, see also J. M. Cody, AJA 77, 1973, 43-50. His title is given in Joseph. (AJ 14.230) as # (MSS #) and also (14.233), quite strangely, as #. Cicero's mention of him in November 48 (Att. 11.6.6, November 27) between the names of Pompey and of Lentulus Spinther, who had died, suggests that he too had been reported dead. Perhaps the report was mistaken, a solution Cadoux prefers, since the legatus of 43 and 42 with the same name appears as an envoy with persons of considerable seniority (MRR 2.351), and the legatus of 42 (2.365) continues in Sextus Pompey's entourage as a person of rank (App. BC 5.139). (TJC) The third place on a legation, however, often went to a younger man, so it remains possible that this legatus was not C. Fannius (9). (Broughton MRR III)
  • Propraetor 48 Asia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • See 49, Promagistrates. Cicero implies that he died this year (Cic. Att. 11.6.6), but see 43, Envoys, and 42, Legates. (Broughton MRR II)
    • On his possible praetorship, see MRR 2.222. Sumner points out. that it is not fully attested[89x] (Orators 145). Promagistrate in Asia, 49-48 (MRR 2.262). The cistophori he issued in Asia give his filiation, C. f., and confirm that he was a pontifex (Pont) while the legend PR may stand for pr(o praetore). On his coinage, see also J. M. Cody, AJA 77, 1973, 43-50. His title is given in Joseph. (AJ 14.230) as # (MSS #) and also (14.233), quite strangely, as #. Cicero's mention of him in November 48 (Att. 11.6.6, November 27) between the names of Pompey and of Lentulus Spinther, who had died, suggests that he too had been reported dead. Perhaps the report was mistaken, a solution Cadoux prefers, since the legatus of 43 and 42 with the same name appears as an envoy with persons of considerable seniority (MRR 2.351), and the legatus of 42 (2.365) continues in Sextus Pompey's entourage as a person of rank (App. BC 5.139). (TJC) The third place on a legation, however, often went to a younger man, so it remains possible that this legatus was not C. Fannius (9). (Broughton MRR III)
  • Legatus (Envoy) 43 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Sent as Envoys from the Senate to Sextus Pompey in Massilia (Cic. Phil. 13.13; see Promagistrates, on Sextus Pompey). See 48, Promagistrates. (Broughton MRR II)
  • Legatus (Lieutenant) 42 Sicilia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • No title preserved. He escaped to Sextus Pompey who gave him a high place on his staff (App. BC 4.84; 5.139). See 48, Promagistrates. (Broughton MRR II)
  • Legatus (Lieutenant) 42 to 36 (DPRR Team) Expand
    • Hinard identifies the proscriptus with C. Fannius, junior senatorial envoy to Sex. Pompey in 43 who in 42 defected to him and was given a position on his staff as legatus. Senior of all the associates of Sextus in 35 in the east, and who had by then been with him for some time. Following Sextus' downfall all surrendered to Antony and were spared (App. BC 5.139). (DPRR Team)
  • Legatus (Lieutenant) 35 (DPRR Team) Expand
    • App. BC 5.139. Named alongside L. Libo, Cassius Parmensis, Q. Nasidius, Saturninus, Thermus, and Antistius as a senior and longstanding associate of Sextus Pompey, all in the East in 35. Following Sextus' downfall, all surrender to Antony. (DPRR Team)

< Back to results