FANN3464 C. Fannius (7) C. f. C. n.

Life Dates

  • 164?, birth (Sumner Orators) Expand

    Sumner R53.

Relationships

father of
? C. Fannius (8) C. f. (pr. before 81) (RE)

Career

  • Legatus (Envoy) 146 (Broughton MRR I) Expand
    • Sent early in the spring by Metellus from Macedonia to dissuade the Assembly of the Achaeans from war, but when insulted and disregarded, they departed, Papirius to Athens and Sparta, Gabinius to Naupactus, and the rest to Athens (Polyb. 38.12-13). (Broughton MRR I)
    • Pr. before 118. Leg., envoy, 146. See MRR 1.468. The envoy sent by Metellus from Macedonia to the Assembly of the Achaeans in 146 was more probably C. Fannius C. f., since as son of the cos. of 161 he was probably older than his cousin C. Fannius M. f (also RE no. 7), who was at Carthage in that year, along with Ti. Gracchus, and may have been a comes or a junior officer on Scipio's staff. See Sumner, Orators 53-55. Tribune of the Plebs, 142. See MRR 1.475, 476, note 3. Sumner is inclined to attribute this tribunate to C. f. in spite of Cicero's impression that M. f. had been tribune in 142 (Att. 16.13b.2), not only because of Cicero's confusion of the two Fannii ? he thought that C. f. became consul later but one inscription (ILLRP 269) shows that the consul was M. f. and another that C. f. was still a praetorius in 113 (see MRR 1.536f., and 537 note 5) - but because a tribunate in 142 for M. f. makes the interval before his consulship in 122 unusually long (Orators 53-55, 171-175). On the embassy of C. Fannius C. f. to Crete, see MRR 1.536, 537, note 5. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Tribunus Plebis? 142 (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • Pr. before 118. Leg., envoy, 146. See MRR 1.468. The envoy sent by Metellus from Macedonia to the Assembly of the Achaeans in 146 was more probably C. Fannius C. f., since as son of the cos. of 161 he was probably older than his cousin C. Fannius M. f (also RE no. 7), who was at Carthage in that year, along with Ti. Gracchus, and may have been a comes or a junior officer on Scipio's staff. See Sumner, Orators 53-55. Tribune of the Plebs, 142. See MRR 1.475, 476, note 3. Sumner is inclined to attribute this tribunate to C. f. in spite of Cicero's impression that M. f. had been tribune in 142 (Att. 16.13b.2), not only because of Cicero's confusion of the two Fannii ? he thought that C. f. became consul later but one inscription (ILLRP 269) shows that the consul was M. f. and another that C. f. was still a praetorius in 113 (see MRR 1.536f., and 537 note 5) - but because a tribunate in 142 for M. f. makes the interval before his consulship in 122 unusually long (Orators 53-55, 171-175). On the embassy of C. Fannius C. f. to Crete, see MRR 1.536, 537, note 5. (Broughton MRR III)
  • Praetor before 118 (Broughton MRR III) Expand
    • Pr. before 118. Leg., envoy, 146. See MRR 1.468. The envoy sent by Metellus from Macedonia to the Assembly of the Achaeans in 146 was more probably C. Fannius C. f., since as son of the cos. of 161 he was probably older than his cousin C. Fannius M. f (also RE no. 7), who was at Carthage in that year, along with Ti. Gracchus, and may have been a comes or a junior officer on Scipio's staff. See Sumner, Orators 53-55. Tribune of the Plebs, 142. See MRR 1.475, 476, note 3. Sumner is inclined to attribute this tribunate to C. f. in spite of Cicero's impression that M. f. had been tribune in 142 (Att. 16.13b.2), not only because of Cicero's confusion of the two Fannii ? he thought that C. f. became consul later but one inscription (ILLRP 269) shows that the consul was M. f. and another that C. f. was still a praetorius in 113 (see MRR 1.536f., and 537 note 5) - but because a tribunate in 142 for M. f. makes the interval before his consulship in 122 unusually long (Orators 53-55, 171-175). On the embassy of C. Fannius C. f. to Crete, see MRR 1.536, 537, note 5. (Broughton MRR III)
    • p. 742, footnote 167 (Brennan 2000)
  • Legatus (Ambassador) 113 Crete (Broughton MRR I) Expand
    • The date of this embassy is set approximately by the course of the disputes in eastern Crete as revealed by the inscriptions cited above and by other inscriptions connected with these disputes (I. Cret. 1.16, nos 3, 4A, 4B, 5, and 18). Mention of the Athenian archon Sarapio provides a terminus post quem in 116 (I. Cret. 1.16.4B, partly repeated in REA 44.35, no. c), and the embassy had reported to the Senate in Rome before June, 112 (I. Cret. 3.4.9, and 10). After 116 there was time for Olus and Lato to come to hostilities, receive an arbitral judgment from Cnossos, and then after further difficulties have that judgment confirmed by the Roman embassy (documents in I. Cret. 1,{538} and REA, above). On the other hand, the hostilities between Itanos and Hierapytna were discussed in the Roman Senate under the Consuls of 115 and 114 (I. Cret. 3.4.10). The embassy under Fabius was sent to Crete, and its report guided the Senate in its deliberations under the Consul of 112. The most probable date for the sending of the embassy is 113. See, most recently, M. Guarducci, Epigraphica 9 (1947) 32-35 (published March, 1949). (Broughton MRR I)
    • This embassy was sent to Crete to intervene in the disputes between a number of cities of eastern Crete, Hierapytna and Itanos, and{537} Olus and Lato, with their respective allies Gortyn and Cnossos, which had led to local wars (H. van Effenterre, REA 44 [1942] 31-51, esp. 36, with all five names; and M. Guarducci, I. Cret. 3.4.9, lines 74ff., and 10, lines 68ff., with mention of Q. Fabius as head of an embassy). (Broughton MRR I)
    • Pr. before 118. Leg., envoy, 146. See MRR 1.468. The envoy sent by Metellus from Macedonia to the Assembly of the Achaeans in 146 was more probably C. Fannius C. f., since as son of the cos. of 161 he was probably older than his cousin C. Fannius M. f (also RE no. 7), who was at Carthage in that year, along with Ti. Gracchus, and may have been a comes or a junior officer on Scipio's staff. See Sumner, Orators 53-55. Tribune of the Plebs, 142. See MRR 1.475, 476, note 3. Sumner is inclined to attribute this tribunate to C. f. in spite of Cicero's impression that M. f. had been tribune in 142 (Att. 16.13b.2), not only because of Cicero's confusion of the two Fannii ? he thought that C. f. became consul later but one inscription (ILLRP 269) shows that the consul was M. f. and another that C. f. was still a praetorius in 113 (see MRR 1.536f., and 537 note 5) - but because a tribunate in 142 for M. f. makes the interval before his consulship in 122 unusually long (Orators 53-55, 171-175). On the embassy of C. Fannius C. f. to Crete, see MRR 1.536, 537, note 5. (Broughton MRR III)