rome after sulla

[qselby]

How would you describe the situation in Rome after Sulla

[M. Porcius Cato]

Rome was not some backwater Hellenistic monarchy, but a republic. Dominance by just one 'big man' was simply not the norm. Look at the breadth of leadership that Rome enjoyed here.

 

After Sulla quit the scene, there were many eminent figures in Rome besides Crassus and Pompey. Between the Sulla's retirement and the consulship of Cicero, eminent figures included P. Servilius Vatia Isauricus (cos. 79; first proconsul of Cilicia; defeated Cilician pirates; captured Corycus; defeated Isauri), M. Aemilius Lepidus (cos. 78; proconsul of Further Gaul), Q. Lutatius Catulus (cos. 78; patronus senatus), L. Licinius Lucullus (cos. 74; conqueror of Mithridates), and Q. Hortensius Hortalus (cos. 69; whom Cicero called "king of the courts").

[ASCLEPIADES]

Salve, guys!

 

Here's a recent thread of a related topic.

 

MARCUS AEMILIUS LEPIDUS

[GaiusMarius]

Be kind this is my first post.

 

I think that, at least in the short term, there was a power vacuum after Sulla's retirement.

 

As an example here is plutarchs account of Sulla's last days:

 

"For instance, ten days before he died, he reconciled the opposing factions in Dicaearchia, and prescribed a code of laws for their conduct of the city's government; and one day before he died, on learning that the magistrate there, Granius, refused to pay a debt he owed the public treasury, in expectation of his death, he summoned him to his room, stationed his servants about him, and ordered them to strangle him" Plutarch.

 

 

In my opinion had the roman government not been in a quandry and still living in fear of their erstwhile dictator and ex-consul they would have dealt with these matters themselves (considering the areas in question were a mere two days ride from rome) and furthermore would have instructed Sulla, a mere private citizen, to keep his nose out of their business. The consuls Appius Claudius Pulcher and Vatia Isauricus should, had they been secure in their authority, deputed someone to deal with the situation and reprimand Sulla for his presumption at least.

 

Some may argue that Sulla still had the legal right to carry on in this way and these powers did not expire upon his resignation:

 

"Moreover, an act was passed granting him immunity for all his past acts, and for the future, power of life and death, of confiscation, of colonization, of founding or demolishing cities, and of taking away or bestowing kingdoms at his pleasure."Plutarch.

 

But is it really believable that a powerful and stable consular government would not have stripped Sulla of these powers immediately upon his abdication of dictatorial status. bearing in mind that the roman senate was ever vigilant in guarding its own powers and rights. For example in the case of M. Livius Drusus during his attempts to enfranchise all of italy as compared with his previously staunch support of the senate and his measures to reduce the power of the knights.

 

Just my point of view though, I'm sure some of you lot'll be able to shoot my theories down in flames.

[caldrail]

The late republic was a turbulent time and being a politician must have been a risky business. Many senators died in proscriptions for backing the wrong side, or simply owning a better villa. Whilst there are always going to be ambitious men and risk-takers in any group, I get the impression that many senators of the period were getting very wary about being outspoken. Indeed, that was part of the point of the proscriptions anyway - the people dealing them out, besides those with larcenous motives, were taking out the troublemakers and leaving a much-cowed senate in place. At least in theory anyway. Also I suspect many new senators brought in to fill the numbers were supporters?

 

What you have in the late republic is factional politics, a power struggle very similar to a gangland war in many respects.

[Maty]

One of the things to consider was the sheer number of aristocratic Romans who got the chop during the Unpleasantness of the 70s and 80s. Once Marius got back to Rome he conducted a purge which included everyone whom he didn't particularly like. This meant the only Roman aristocrats left in Rome by the time he had finished were pro-Marians, and they got the chop when Sulla came back and ran his own purge. This led firstly to a lot of traumatized Romans in the last generation of the Roman republic who as children had seen close relatives with their heads on pikes in the forum under Marius/Sulla (which explains some of their irrationality at the start of the civil wars).

And secondly the purges led to a lot of Romans who did not occupy their family's habitual top spots in government on account of being dead and not breeding, which made life a lot easier for people such as Pompey, Cicero and Caesar.

[cornelius_sulla]

Even the proscriptions did not leave a power vacuum. Pompey hit the ground running as a force to be reckoned with, what with most of Picenum in his clientele and willing to form legions loyal to him ( and his father's memory ) before Rome. Sulla recognised his imprortance and gave him extraordinarily unconstitutional powers, often as far away from Rome as possible. Q. Metellus Pius, L. Licinius Lucullus, and Q. Sertorius were formidable generals. Q. Hortensius, Antonius Orator, Catulus held sway in the courts. Crassus was augmenting his fortune. Add to that list Vatia Isauricus, Mamercus, A. Claudius Pulcher... Rome after Sulla suffered no lack of leadership or personality.

[ASCLEPIADES]

I agree. Apparently, what the Res Publica had after the Big Man's death was some kind of balance, which was going to last for more than a generation, even if not unchallenged.

 

Was all of this planned by Sulla & Co.?

Or was it a fortuitous development after his unexpected demise?

 

What do you think?

[Vibius Tiberius Costa]

I agree. Apparently, what the Res Publica had after the Big Man's death was some kind of balance, which was going to last for more than a generation, even if not unchallenged.

 

Was all of this planned by Sulla & Co.?

Or was it a fortuitous development after his unexpected demise?

 

What do you think?

 

I think this was more of your second response. It was the calm after the storm. Like the swell of power was now being restored. Nothing drastic.

 

vtc

Edited August 29, 2007 by Vibius Tiberius Costa