Digital Prosopography of the Roman Republic

SEXT2468 T. Sextius (13)

Career

  • Quaestor? before 53 (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • As a legatus in Gaul in 53-51 (MRR 2.232, 239, 245), he probably was a quaestor by 54. His praetorship in 45 is inferred from his command in Africa Nova in 44 (MRR 2.330; see Sumner, Phoenix 25, 1971, 360-361; Wiseman, CQ 14, 1964, 130-131; NM 261, no. 402). (Broughton MRR III)
  • Legatus (Lieutenant) 53 Gallia Transalpina (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Legate of Caesar in Gaul (Caes. BG 6.1.1). (Broughton MRR II)
  • Legatus (Lieutenant) 52 Gallia Transalpina (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Legate under Caesar in Gaul (Caes. BG 7.49.1, and 51.2, and 90.6; cf. 8.11.1). (Broughton MRR II)
  • Legatus (Lieutenant) 51 Gallia Transalpina (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Legate under Caesar in Gaul (Hirt. in Caes. BG 8. 11. 1). (Broughton MRR II)
  • Praetor 45 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Probably a Praetor in 45 since he governed Africa Nova in 44 (see 44, Promagistrates). (Broughton MRR II)
    • As a legatus in Gaul in 53-51 (MRR 2.232, 239, 245), he probably was a quaestor by 54. His praetorship in 45 is inferred from his command in Africa Nova in 44 (MRR 2.330; see Sumner, Phoenix 25, 1971, 360-361; Wiseman, CQ 14, 1964, 130-131; NM 261, no. 402). (Broughton MRR III)
  • Promagistrate 44 Africa Nova (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Governor of Africa Nova, probably in succession to Sallust, since it seems reasonable to suppose that he was appointed by Caesar (App. BC 4.53, where I take the first # to refer to Iulius Caesar; Dio 48.21.1; see 43, Promagistrates). See Sternkopf, Hermes 47 (1912) 329. (Broughton MRR II)
  • Promagistrate 43 Africa Nova (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Governor of Africa Nova (see 44, and 42, Promagistrates), one of whose legions was transferred to Cornificius in Africa Vetus in March while two were recalled to Rome (Cic. Fam. 12.25.1-2; App. BC 3.85; cf. Cic. Fam. 10.24.4; 11.26; see above, on Cornificius). The Triumvirs assigned him Cornificius' province (App. BC 4.53; Dio 48.21.1-2; see Ganter, Philologus 53 [18941142-145). (Broughton MRR II)
  • Promagistrate 42 Africa (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • 1 The use of the terms Legate and Proconsul under the Second Triumvirate is of necessity attended by uncertainty and confusion. Commanders, like Ventidius Bassus, who were for the most part ex-Consuls, held command over large and important areas and armies, and apparently acted with considerable initiative, are termed Legati in Latin sources such as the Periochae of Livy and Florus and # in Dio (Liv. Per. 127, 128; Flor. 2.19; Dio 48.41.5; cf. 49.21, and Act. Tr. for 38, on the title and triumph of Ventidius), and yet many of them appear in the lists of triumphs as Proconsuls. In mentioning the triumph of Domitius Calvinus, Dio (48.42.3-4) remarks that those in power granted honors at will # (see also 49.42.3; 54.12.1-2). Mommsen finds the beginning of this contradiction in Caesar's grant of triumphs at the end of 45 to his Legates Fabius Maximus and Q. Pedius (see 45, Promagistrates). Like these, the later commanders were Legates also under the superior imperium of the Triumviri, and their appearance as Proconsuls depended upon a fictive grant of imperium for the day of their triumph (Str. 1.125, 130f.; 2.245, note 1). The term Proconsul cannot refer to their status in command since a Legate never had more than an imperium pro praetore. The term Legatus pro consule does not occur, and indeed cannot occur because it is intrinsically self-contradictory (ibid. 1.130f.). Moreover it was simply this permission to triumph that made it logically possible for some of these Legates to accept acclamation as Imperator (see, on Sosius, Mommsen Str. 1.125). Mommsen's doctrine is difficult to test because in nearly all cases no official inscriptions remain from the period of command, and several of the commands are known only from the record of the triumph (see 34-32, Promagistrates, on Norbanus Flaccus, Statilius Taurus, Marcius Philippus, Olaudius Pulcher, and L. Cornificius). The term Legatus in Livy and Florus is strongly in his favor, since Die might have been affected by the regular system of Legati pro praetore in the Empire. However, as Canter saw (46-55), the situation was more complicated. The illogicality of a subordinate with an imperium pro consule occurs under Antony on the official coinage in Greece of M. lunius Silanus, who terms himself Quaestor pro consule (see 34, Promagistrates; note that in the Empire Pliny could be given the exceptional position of Legatus pro praetore consulari potestate), and raises the question how many commanders senior to Silanus may not also have held an imperium pro consule under the superior imperium of the Triumviri. Moreover, Sosius (Cos. 32) apparently termed himself Imperator on his coinage from 37 B. C. (see 37, Promagistrates), on a rather distant anticipation of the moment of a fictive grant of imperium pro consule for a day in 34; and there were others, like Laronius (see 33, Consules Suffecti), who took the title Imperator and did not triumph at all. The period of the Second Triumvirate was a period of transition in which irregularities and illogicalities could frequently occur in the government of the Roman Empire, before the Augustan regime rebuilt the pattern anew. I have therefore been inclined to keep the question open; and to list among the Promagistrates the holders of important commands under Octavian and Antony who received acclamation as Imperatores or celebrated triumphs. It must be granted that the superior position of the Triumvirs in this period made the difference between the functions of a Promagistrate and of a Legate much less than it had been before. See Ganter 46-55. (Broughton MRR II)
    • Proconsul in Africa Nova (see 44, and 43, Promagistrates). The Triumvirs appointed him to both African (Broughton MRR II)
  • Promagistrate 41 Africa Vetus, Africa Nova (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Proconsul in Africa (see 42, Promagistrates). At the command of Lucius Antonius he yielded Africa to Octavian's appointee Fuficius Fango (see above), but remained in the province, and toward the end of the year, again at the command of Lucius Antonius, began a campaign to recover it (App. BC 5.26, who terms him #; Dio 48.22; see 40, Promagistrates). (Broughton MRR II)
  • Promagistrate 40 Africa Vetus, Africa Nova (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • See 42, and 41, Promagistrates. He recovered the African provinces from Fuficius Fango (see above), but was succeeded by Lepidus about the middle of the year (App. BC 5.53, and 75; Dio 48.20.4-5, and 23.4; see Ganter 21f.). (Broughton MRR II)

< Back to results