Digital Prosopography of the Roman Republic

COEL2408 M. Coelius (27) Vinicianus

Relationships

adopted son of
? M. Coelius (A) (adoptive father of? M. Coelius (27) Vinicianus (pr.? 48)) (Zmeskal 2009)
brother of
? L. Vinicius (1) M. f. Pob.? (cos. suff. 33) (Zmeskal 2009) Expand

Asc. Cornel. 59C, Caes. b.Alex. 77.2

Career

  • Quaestor? 56 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • CIL 12.2.781. The date is conjectural. See 53, Tribunes of the Plebs. (Broughton MRR II)
  • Tribunus Plebis 53 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • CIL 12.2.781. Together with Hirrus he proposed that Pompey be made Dictator, but failed to carry it (Cael., in Cic. Fam. 8.4.3; Plut. Pomp. 54.2-3; cf. Cic. QF 3.4.1, and 8.4, and 9.3; Dio 40.45, cf. 17.1; Obseq. 63). (Broughton MRR II)
    • Praetor pro consule. As Sumner has shown, his receipt from Caesar of command over two legions in Asia in 47 is no proof that he had been a praetor in 48 (as in MRR 2.273, cf. 288). He suggests (Phoenix 25, 1971, 251) that the order of offices in ILS 883-ILLRP 402 may be correct and that he was procos. in 47 before he became a praetor, therefore in 46 at the earliest, a date consistent with being a tr. pl. in 53 and a candidate for the plebeian aedileship in 50 (Cic. Fam. 8.4.3), but Degrassi (loc. cit.), following Mommsen (StR 2?.650, note 2), considers praetor pro consule a single office.[60] (Broughton MRR III)
  • Repulsa (Aed.) 50 (Pina Polo 2012) Expand
    • pp. 65-72 (Pina Polo 2012)
  • Praetor? 48 (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • See 47, Promagistrates. (Broughton MRR II)
    • Praetor pro consule. As Sumner has shown, his receipt from Caesar of command over two legions in Asia in 47 is no proof that he had been a praetor in 48 (as in MRR 2.273, cf. 288). He suggests (Phoenix 25, 1971, 251) that the order of offices in ILS 883-ILLRP 402 may be correct and that he was procos. in 47 before he became a praetor, therefore in 46 at the earliest, a date consistent with being a tr. pl. in 53 and a candidate for the plebeian aedileship in 50 (Cic. Fam. 8.4.3), but Degrassi (loc. cit.), following Mommsen (StR 2?.650, note 2), considers praetor pro consule a single office.[60] (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proconsul 47 Bithynia?, Pontus? (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Caesar left him in command in Pontus with two legions (Bell. Alex. 77.2, Caelio, where no title is given; pro consule, or perhaps anomalously, praetor pro consule in CIL 12.2.781-ILS 883, undated with the spelling Coelio; see Syme, Anat. Stud. Buckler 319, note 5; Broughton TAPhA 77 [1946] 38, note 18). (Broughton MRR II)
    • Praetor pro consule. As Sumner has shown, his receipt from Caesar of command over two legions in Asia in 47 is no proof that he had been a praetor in 48 (as in MRR 2.273, cf. 288). He suggests (Phoenix 25, 1971, 251) that the order of offices in ILS 883-ILLRP 402 may be correct and that he was procos. in 47 before he became a praetor, therefore in 46 at the earliest, a date consistent with being a tr. pl. in 53 and a candidate for the plebeian aedileship in 50 (Cic. Fam. 8.4.3), but Degrassi (loc. cit.), following Mommsen (StR 2?.650, note 2), considers praetor pro consule a single office.[60] (Broughton MRR III)
  • Praetor? after 47 (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • Praetor pro consule. As Sumner has shown, his receipt from Caesar of command over two legions in Asia in 47 is no proof that he had been a praetor in 48 (as in MRR 2.273, cf. 288). He suggests (Phoenix 25, 1971, 251) that the order of offices in ILS 883-ILLRP 402 may be correct and that he was procos. in 47 before he became a praetor, therefore in 46 at the earliest, a date consistent with being a tr. pl. in 53 and a candidate for the plebeian aedileship in 50 (Cic. Fam. 8.4.3), but Degrassi (loc. cit.), following Mommsen (StR 2?.650, note 2), considers praetor pro consule a single office.[60] (Broughton MRR III)

< Back to results