M. Iunius Brutus Name

[Caesar CXXXVII]

Just wait a second , if Marcus Iunius Brutus was adopted by his uncle, Quintus Servilius Caepio and became Quintus Servilius Caepio Brutus (why not Quintus Servilius Caepio Iunianus ?) why we continue to regard him as Marcus Iunius Brutus ? How should we name him ? why not just Caesar's ("The wicked") Assassin ?

 

Now Seriously...why Marcus Iunius Brutus ?

[Nephele]

I actually covered this in my Surnames of the Servilii with M

[Caesar CXXXVII]

I actually covered this in my Surnames of the Servilii with M

Edited December 11, 2008 by Caesar CXXXVII

[Ingsoc]

Please correct me if I am wrong, the bottom line is that the sdoption was fictitious ? More than that, he "choose" to be named "Brutus" and not Iunianus ? Do we know when he returned to his original name (after 59 and before 53 ?), by what means he did it ?

 

There are other opinions, Clarke (in his book "The Noblest Roman: Marcus Brutus and His Reputation") think that the adoption was legit and occurred a short time before the death of the adopted relative.

 

I don't think that he ever return to be named "Marcus Iunius Brutus". for example, this coin which was struck in the east a few months before the Battle of Philippi give Brutus full name as "Quintus Caepio Brutus".

Edited December 11, 2008 by Ingsoc

[Caesar CXXXVII]

Please correct me if I am wrong, the bottom line is that the sdoption was fictitious ? More than that, he "choose" to be named "Brutus" and not Iunianus ? Do we know when he returned to his original name (after 59 and before 53 ?), by what means he did it ?

 

There are other opinions, Clarke (in his book "The Noblest Roman: Marcus Brutus and His Reputation") think that the adoption was legit and occurred a short time before the death of the adopted relative.

 

I don't think that he ever return to be named "Marcus Iunius Brutus". for example, this coin which was struck in the east a few months before the Battle of Philippi give Brutus full name as "Quintus Caepio Brutus".

 

 

Amazing !

So why we all call him M. Iunius Brutus ? It is the same as calling Scipio Aemilianus - Aemilius Paullus . I am buffeled (that is the word ?)

[Nephele]

I actually covered this in my Surnames of the Servilii with M

[Maty]

Another interesting thing about Brutus is that he was a plebeian, whereas his alleged ancestor Lucius Brutus was very much a patrician. Odd that he should have 'inherited' the name without the status.

[ASCLEPIADES]

Salve, M

Another interesting thing about Brutus is that he was a plebeian, whereas his alleged ancestor Lucius Brutus was very much a patrician. Odd that he should have 'inherited' the name without the status.

This issue has been extensively discussed on a previous thread. My own conclusion after all that: Lucius Brutus was a too mythological (ie, fictitious) figure to reach any useful conclusion regarding the patrician-plebeian social system.

 

In any case, the indisputedly plebeian Marcus Brutus was indeed widely accepted as Lucius Brutus descendent, MT Cicero included. And as far as I know, patrician status inheritance was not optional (just ask Clodius).

[Nephele]

Salve, M

Another interesting thing about Brutus is that he was a plebeian, whereas his alleged ancestor Lucius Brutus was very much a patrician. Odd that he should have 'inherited' the name without the status.

This issue has been extensively discussed on a previous thread. My own conclusion after all that: Lucius Brutus was a too mythological (ie, fictitious) figure to reach any useful conclusion regarding the patrician-plebeian social system.

 

In any case, the indisputedly plebeian Marcus Brutus was indeed widely accepted as Lucius Brutus descendent, MT Cicero included. And as far as I know, patrician status inheritance was not optional (just ask Clodius).

 

That topic was Brutus: Patrician or Plebeian?, and I believe Maty is already aware of that topic, seeing as how he participated in it.

 

While I agree that L. Iunius Brutus was probably legendized, I continue to share M

[ASCLEPIADES]

While I agree that L. Iunius Brutus was probably legendized, I continue to share M

[Ingsoc]

Another possibility is that Brutus family simple transfered to the plebs at one point and choose to keep it's name because it's prestige. There is an interesting article by Rachel Feig Vishnia which suggest that such transfers were common in the early republic for the young patricians saw a greater chance of serving in as a plebs magister than a patrician magister, the may explain the plebian families with patricians ancestors.

[Nephele]

Regarding MT Cicero, without additional evidence, I must believe he meant what he said (Brutus, cp. LIII):

 

Quis enim putet aut celeritatem ingeni L. Bruto illi nobilitatis vestrae principi defuisse?

"For who can question the address, and the capacity of Brutus, the illustrious founder of your family?"

 

This is within a scholar review of Greek and Roman orators; if irony was intended from Cicero (?), this was hardly the right place.

 

Asclepiades, there is no need to continually reiterate yourself (or for me to do likewise), as it does not add additional weight to one's argument. We've already covered this in the other topic.

 

-- Nephele

[Maty]

Salve A

 

Yup, I do remember the earlier thread, because it provoked me to look into the matter. The problem is that there is an inherent contradiction. We might believe that Brutus and the Regnal period are semi-myth (though I tend toward the literalist camp) but the Romans had clear ideas about what happened when - even if those ideas were misguided. What is interesting (and forgive me if this has been gone over elsewhere as well) is the theory that Lucius himself might have been a plebeian - he was practically a member of the ruling family, and it has been argued that the kings of Rome had - constitutionally speaking - to be plebs. (The interrex had to be a patrician, and this stopped him picking himself). If anyone has come up with proof that Lucius had to be a patrician I'd like to know where to find it.

 

A further possibility is a non-conferrateo marriage, or one between a plebeian and patrician which resulted in the husband losing statues (this is one theory as to how the Claudii Marcelli came to be plebs). What's interesting is that contradiction - the Romans accepted Brutus as the descendant of the liberator, yet seem to have had so little issue with his pleb status, they did not, afik, even discuss it.

[Placida]

Another interesting thing about Brutus is that he was a plebeian, whereas his alleged ancestor Lucius Brutus was very much a patrician. Odd that he should have 'inherited' the name without the status.

 

BRUTUS, the name of a plebeian family of the Junia Gens, which traced its descent from the first consul, L. Junius Brutus. (Comp. Cic. Phil. i. 6', Brut. 4.) It was denied by many of the ancients that this family could be descended from the first consul, first, because the latter was a patrician, and secondly, because his race became extinct at his death, as he had only two sons, who were executed by his own orders. (Dionys. v. 18, comp. vi. 70; Dion. Cass. xliv. 12; Pint. Brut. 1.) Posidonius, indeed, as