Digital Prosopography of the Roman Republic

FURF2498 T. Furfanius (1) Postumus

Career

  • Quaestor before 57 (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • Quaestor in Sicily (Cic. Att. 7.15.2; see 50, and 46, Promagistrates; and on the name, Fam. 6.8.3). (Broughton MRR II)
    • His praetorship in 46 (MRR 2.295) is simply an inference from his proconsulate in Sicily in 45 (Cic. Fam. 6.9; 8.3), insufficient for proof, as Sumner points out (Phoenix 25, 1971, 268-269). Sumner suggests that the special distinction of the jury on which he served in Milo's trial in 52 (Cic. Mil. 74-75; cf. Ascon. 38-39C; Veil. 2.76.1) implies that he was a senator by 52. If so, his quaestorship was considerably earlier, not in 51 (MRR 2.241), and his command in Sicily in 50 and 49 (2.250, 262) was not as proquaestor but possibly as an ex praetor (cf. Shackleton Bailey, CLA 4.311). It must have begun before 51, and, in view of the decree of 53 setting an interval of five years between city magistracy and provincial command, by 53. Hence his praetorship would date from 55 at the latest (Sumner, loc. cit.). Cf. J. Linderski, Stud. E. Volterra 2.285, on M. Nonius Sufenas, pr. 55, and governor of an eastern province in 51-50. On Furfanius' name, see Shackleton Bailey, CLA 2.311, 7.96ff.; CLF 2.403; and Studies 40, with evidence favoring the form Furfanus. See Wiseman, NM 233, no. 188. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Praetor before 54 (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • The Proconsul of Sicily in 45 was probably a Praetor in 46 (see 45, Promagistrates). (Broughton MRR II)
    • His praetorship in 46 (MRR 2.295) is simply an inference from his proconsulate in Sicily in 45 (Cic. Fam. 6.9; 8.3), insufficient for proof, as Sumner points out (Phoenix 25, 1971, 268-269). Sumner suggests that the special distinction of the jury on which he served in Milo's trial in 52 (Cic. Mil. 74-75; cf. Ascon. 38-39C; Veil. 2.76.1) implies that he was a senator by 52. If so, his quaestorship was considerably earlier, not in 51 (MRR 2.241), and his command in Sicily in 50 and 49 (2.250, 262) was not as proquaestor but possibly as an ex praetor (cf. Shackleton Bailey, CLA 4.311). It must have begun before 51, and, in view of the decree of 53 setting an interval of five years between city magistracy and provincial command, by 53. Hence his praetorship would date from 55 at the latest (Sumner, loc. cit.). Cf. J. Linderski, Stud. E. Volterra 2.285, on M. Nonius Sufenas, pr. 55, and governor of an eastern province in 51-50. On Furfanius' name, see Shackleton Bailey, CLA 2.311, 7.96ff.; CLF 2.403; and Studies 40, with evidence favoring the form Furfanus. See Wiseman, NM 233, no. 188. (Broughton MRR III)
    • p. 750, footnote 338 (Brennan 2000)
  • Proquaestor before 52 Sicilia (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • His praetorship in 46 (MRR 2.295) is simply an inference from his proconsulate in Sicily in 45 (Cic. Fam. 6.9; 8.3), insufficient for proof, as Sumner points out (Phoenix 25, 1971, 268-269). Sumner suggests that the special distinction of the jury on which he served in Milo's trial in 52 (Cic. Mil. 74-75; cf. Ascon. 38-39C; Veil. 2.76.1) implies that he was a senator by 52. If so, his quaestorship was considerably earlier, not in 51 (MRR 2.241), and his command in Sicily in 50 and 49 (2.250, 262) was not as proquaestor but possibly as an ex praetor (cf. Shackleton Bailey, CLA 4.311). It must have begun before 51, and, in view of the decree of 53 setting an interval of five years between city magistracy and provincial command, by 53. Hence his praetorship would date from 55 at the latest (Sumner, loc. cit.). Cf. J. Linderski, Stud. E. Volterra 2.285, on M. Nonius Sufenas, pr. 55, and governor of an eastern province in 51-50. On Furfanius' name, see Shackleton Bailey, CLA 2.311, 7.96ff.; CLF 2.403; and Studies 40, with evidence favoring the form Furfanus. See Wiseman, NM 233, no. 188. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proquaestor 52 Sicilia (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • His praetorship in 46 (MRR 2.295) is simply an inference from his proconsulate in Sicily in 45 (Cic. Fam. 6.9; 8.3), insufficient for proof, as Sumner points out (Phoenix 25, 1971, 268-269). Sumner suggests that the special distinction of the jury on which he served in Milo's trial in 52 (Cic. Mil. 74-75; cf. Ascon. 38-39C; Veil. 2.76.1) implies that he was a senator by 52. If so, his quaestorship was considerably earlier, not in 51 (MRR 2.241), and his command in Sicily in 50 and 49 (2.250, 262) was not as proquaestor but possibly as an ex praetor (cf. Shackleton Bailey, CLA 4.311). It must have begun before 51, and, in view of the decree of 53 setting an interval of five years between city magistracy and provincial command, by 53. Hence his praetorship would date from 55 at the latest (Sumner, loc. cit.). Cf. J. Linderski, Stud. E. Volterra 2.285, on M. Nonius Sufenas, pr. 55, and governor of an eastern province in 51-50. On Furfanius' name, see Shackleton Bailey, CLA 2.311, 7.96ff.; CLF 2.403; and Studies 40, with evidence favoring the form Furfanus. See Wiseman, NM 233, no. 188. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Iudex 52 (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • His praetorship in 46 (MRR 2.295) is simply an inference from his proconsulate in Sicily in 45 (Cic. Fam. 6.9; 8.3), insufficient for proof, as Sumner points out (Phoenix 25, 1971, 268-269). Sumner suggests that the special distinction of the jury on which he served in Milo's trial in 52 (Cic. Mil. 74-75; cf. Ascon. 38-39C; Veil. 2.76.1) implies that he was a senator by 52. If so, his quaestorship was considerably earlier, not in 51 (MRR 2.241), and his command in Sicily in 50 and 49 (2.250, 262) was not as proquaestor but possibly as an ex praetor (cf. Shackleton Bailey, CLA 4.311). It must have begun before 51, and, in view of the decree of 53 setting an interval of five years between city magistracy and provincial command, by 53. Hence his praetorship would date from 55 at the latest (Sumner, loc. cit.). Cf. J. Linderski, Stud. E. Volterra 2.285, on M. Nonius Sufenas, pr. 55, and governor of an eastern province in 51-50. On Furfanius' name, see Shackleton Bailey, CLA 2.311, 7.96ff.; CLF 2.403; and Studies 40, with evidence favoring the form Furfanus. See Wiseman, NM 233, no. 188. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proquaestor 51 Sicilia (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • His praetorship in 46 (MRR 2.295) is simply an inference from his proconsulate in Sicily in 45 (Cic. Fam. 6.9; 8.3), insufficient for proof, as Sumner points out (Phoenix 25, 1971, 268-269). Sumner suggests that the special distinction of the jury on which he served in Milo's trial in 52 (Cic. Mil. 74-75; cf. Ascon. 38-39C; Veil. 2.76.1) implies that he was a senator by 52. If so, his quaestorship was considerably earlier, not in 51 (MRR 2.241), and his command in Sicily in 50 and 49 (2.250, 262) was not as proquaestor but possibly as an ex praetor (cf. Shackleton Bailey, CLA 4.311). It must have begun before 51, and, in view of the decree of 53 setting an interval of five years between city magistracy and provincial command, by 53. Hence his praetorship would date from 55 at the latest (Sumner, loc. cit.). Cf. J. Linderski, Stud. E. Volterra 2.285, on M. Nonius Sufenas, pr. 55, and governor of an eastern province in 51-50. On Furfanius' name, see Shackleton Bailey, CLA 2.311, 7.96ff.; CLF 2.403; and Studies 40, with evidence favoring the form Furfanus. See Wiseman, NM 233, no. 188. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proquaestor 50 Sicilia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Apparently continued as Proquaestor in Sicily (Cic. Att. 7.15.2; see 51, Quaestors). (Broughton MRR II)
    • His praetorship in 46 (MRR 2.295) is simply an inference from his proconsulate in Sicily in 45 (Cic. Fam. 6.9; 8.3), insufficient for proof, as Sumner points out (Phoenix 25, 1971, 268-269). Sumner suggests that the special distinction of the jury on which he served in Milo's trial in 52 (Cic. Mil. 74-75; cf. Ascon. 38-39C; Veil. 2.76.1) implies that he was a senator by 52. If so, his quaestorship was considerably earlier, not in 51 (MRR 2.241), and his command in Sicily in 50 and 49 (2.250, 262) was not as proquaestor but possibly as an ex praetor (cf. Shackleton Bailey, CLA 4.311). It must have begun before 51, and, in view of the decree of 53 setting an interval of five years between city magistracy and provincial command, by 53. Hence his praetorship would date from 55 at the latest (Sumner, loc. cit.). Cf. J. Linderski, Stud. E. Volterra 2.285, on M. Nonius Sufenas, pr. 55, and governor of an eastern province in 51-50. On Furfanius' name, see Shackleton Bailey, CLA 2.311, 7.96ff.; CLF 2.403; and Studies 40, with evidence favoring the form Furfanus. See Wiseman, NM 233, no. 188. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proquaestor 49 Sicilia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • In command of Sicily, perhaps Proquaestor pro praetore, at the beginning of 49 (Cic. Att. 7.15.2; on the name, see Fam. 6.8.3). (Broughton MRR II)
    • His praetorship in 46 (MRR 2.295) is simply an inference from his proconsulate in Sicily in 45 (Cic. Fam. 6.9; 8.3), insufficient for proof, as Sumner points out (Phoenix 25, 1971, 268-269). Sumner suggests that the special distinction of the jury on which he served in Milo's trial in 52 (Cic. Mil. 74-75; cf. Ascon. 38-39C; Veil. 2.76.1) implies that he was a senator by 52. If so, his quaestorship was considerably earlier, not in 51 (MRR 2.241), and his command in Sicily in 50 and 49 (2.250, 262) was not as proquaestor but possibly as an ex praetor (cf. Shackleton Bailey, CLA 4.311). It must have begun before 51, and, in view of the decree of 53 setting an interval of five years between city magistracy and provincial command, by 53. Hence his praetorship would date from 55 at the latest (Sumner, loc. cit.). Cf. J. Linderski, Stud. E. Volterra 2.285, on M. Nonius Sufenas, pr. 55, and governor of an eastern province in 51-50. On Furfanius' name, see Shackleton Bailey, CLA 2.311, 7.96ff.; CLF 2.403; and Studies 40, with evidence favoring the form Furfanus. See Wiseman, NM 233, no. 188. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Proconsul 45 Sicilia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Proconsul in Sicily (Cic. Fam. 6.9, and 8.3). (Broughton MRR II)

< Back to results