Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T07:44:05.926Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

M. Arrecinus Clemens*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2015

B. W. Jones  and
R. Develin
B. W. Jones
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
R. Develin
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Some thirty-five years ago, Passerini discussed the career of this eminent Flavian senator, inspired, it would appear, by the discovery of an inscription revealing his hitherto unknown legateship of Spain; but the possibilities of this inscription were not fully explored. A re-evaluation of Clemens' career seems desirable.

Type
Research Article
Information
Antichthon , Volume 10 , 1976 , pp. 79 - 83
Copyright
Copyright © Australasian Society for Classical Studies 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This is a modified version of part of a paper presented to a seminar in Ancient History held at the University of Tasmania in February 1976. Thanks are offered to those who were present foi stimulating discussion. Eck = W. Eck, Senatoren von Vespasian bis Hadrian (Munich, 1970). Eck, ANRW = W. Eck, ‘Beforderungskriterien innerhalb der senatorischen Laufbahn, dargestellt an der Zeit von 69 bis 138 n. Chr.’ Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt ii. 1 (Berlin/New York, 1974), pp. 158-228. FC = A. Degrassi, I fasti consolari dell' Impero Romano dal 30 avanti Cristo al 613 dopo Cristo (Rome, 1952). FH = G. Alföldy, Fasti Hispanienses (Wiesbaden, 1969). Passerini = A. Passerini, ‘M. Arrecino Clemente’, Athenaeum 18 (1940), 145-63. ST = R. Syme, Tacitus (Oxford, 1958). Townend = G. B. Townend, ‘Some Flavian Connections’, JRS 51 (1961), 54-62. Wilkes = J. J. Wilkes, Dalmatia (London, 1969).

References

1 Passerini, 145-63.

2 Groag referred to it in his article on Clemens (PIR 2, A 1072, published in 1933Google Scholar): ‘ad eum pertinere videtur fragmentum t. Pisaurensis adhuc quod sciam ineditum’; it was subsequently published as AE 1947, 40 (see below p. 80).

3 Arrecinum Clementem, domui Vespasiani per adfinitatem innexum et gratissimum Domitiano, praetorianis praeposuit, patrem eius sub C. Caesare egregie functum ea cura dictitans, laetum militibus idem nomen, atque ipsum, quamquam senatorii ordinis, ad utraque munia sufficere (Tac. Hist, iv 68Google Scholar).

4 PIR 2, A 1074Google Scholar. The cognomina of both brother and sister are a prosopographer's delight, for Vespasian's brother's grandson was a Clemens and his (Vespasian's) paternal grandmother a Tertulla. See Townend, 54 ff.

5 Castritius, H., Historia 18 (1969), 492 ff.Google Scholar; cf. Jones, B. W., PP 27 (1972), 320-1Google Scholar.

6 Townend, 56-7.

7 gratissimum Domitiano (Tac. Hist, iv 68Google Scholar).

8 Whether or not Tiberius Julius Alexander was his colleague (or successor) seems impossible to determine. On Tiberius as praetorian prefect see Turner, E. G., JRS 44 (1954), 54–64Google Scholar; his view was rejected by Burr, V., Tiberius Julius Alexander (Antiquitas 1, Bonn, 1955), p. 112Google Scholar, and regarded somewhat sceptically in ST, p. 509 n. 6. Passerini, 155 ff., argues that Clemens preceded Titus as prefect; but he was unaware of Pap. Hibeh 215.

9 FC, p. 21.

10 The dispute about this consulship should have been settled by Syme, Sir Ronald, ST, p. 638Google Scholar, where the evidence is outlined and discussed. H. Nesselhauf in his review of FC put forward ideas similar to Syme, 's (Gnomon 26 [1954], 270Google Scholar), though Degrassi remained unconvinced (Athenaeum 33 [1955], 12 ff.Google Scholar). For a detailed examination of the consuls of this year, see Modugno, S., Panciera, S., Zevi, F., ‘Osservazioni sui consoli dell' 85 d.C’, RSA 3 (1973), 87–108.Google Scholar

11 AE 1947, 40.

12 E.g. FH, p. 22, and Eck, pp. 130 ff.

13 Compare the career of Frontonianus, A. Cornelius Palma, cos. ord. 99 (FC, p. 29Google Scholar) and governor of Spain in the same year (Eck, p. 154 with n. 178).

14 FH, pp. 17 ff. and 202; Eck, p. 242.

15 Bosworth, A. B., Athenaeum 51 (1973), 74-5Google Scholar. In addition, it is worth noting Syme's hypothesis (HSCP 73 [1969], 216Google Scholar n. 50) that Aurelius Fulvus held Spain in 70 as a praetorian legate (but cf. Eck, p. 226 n. 478). If correct, an even wider gap for Clemens would be created.

16 It was noted by Morris, Dr. J. in his unpublished doctoral thesis, The Roman Senate 69-193 A.D. (London, 1953Google Scholar); he argued that Clemens was urban prefect.

17 E.g. Passerini, 153.

18 PIR 2, L 320.Google Scholar

19 FC, pp. 28 and 36: a gap of over thirty years between successive tenures of the consulship is not unparalleled at this period (see FH, p. 31).

20 FC, pp. 38 and 41.

21 In the index to ILS, 37 examples of the urban praetorship are given: pr. urb. is used on 15 occasions, praet. urb. on 4, with the unabbreviated form for the rest. In the 14 instances of the urban prefecture (before Diocletian) that are cited the only abbreviation used for praefectus is praef., and it appears in 10 of the inscriptions noted.

22 ILS 1142. For Fabius see PIR 2, F 27Google Scholar and FC, p. 53.

23 See ST, p. 805; Griffith, J. C., G. & R. 16 (1969), 137Google Scholar n. 22.

24 PIR 1, P 164Google Scholar and Wilkes, J. J., ES 4 (1967), 119-21Google Scholar.

25 Dig. i 2. 2. 53 would seem to place Pegasus under Vespasian; we need not trust Pomponius here, but Juvenal too might be a problem. Fortunately this will not affect our placing of Clemens.

26 The comment of J. D. Duff in his edition (Cambridge, 1970), p. 172 (p. 182 in earlier edition), that the ‘astonishment’ of the city relates to Domitian's reign of terror seems unacceptable.

27 Mommsen, Th., Römisches Staatsrecht 3 (Leipzig, 1887), Vol. ii, pp. 1059-70.Google Scholar

28 ST, p. 644; Wilkes, p. 444.

29 PIR 1, R 167Google Scholar; Eck, , ANRW, p. 224Google Scholar n. 341.

30 S. Modugno, S. Panciera, F. Zevi, op. cit. 94 (note 10 above).

31 See below n. 45.

32 PIR 2, A 1510.Google Scholar

33 S. Modugno, S. Panciera, F. Zevi, op. cit. 87 ff.

34 See Rufus, Q. Petillius Cerealis Caesius, probably cos III ord. in 83 (Birley, A. R., Britannia 4 [1973], 186-7Google Scholar); Crispus, L. Iunius Quintus Vibius, cos III suff. 83 (PIR 1, J 847Google Scholar); Flavinus, M. PompeiusSilvanus Staberius, cos III des. for 83 (Eck, W., ZPE 9 [1972], 259-76Google Scholar).

35 Tac. Hist. iv 68.Google Scholar

36 FH, p. 23.

37 FH, D. 23 n. 118, lists the evidence for Acilius and his curatorship.

38 PIR 2, A 1072Google Scholar and FH, p. 23 n. 118.

39 Wiegels, R., Gnomon 46 (1974), 192-3Google Scholar; Eck, , AMSW, p. 208Google Scholar n. 255.

40 Townend, 57 n. 9. Townend's use of the Rudiae inscription is not beyond reproach, for it would be rather foolish for a wife to commemorate her husband after his exile (compare Vitia's fate under Tiberius: Tac. Ann. vi 10Google Scholar), and in any case it is not impossible that Cornelia merely had estates at Rudiae. It is to be noted that Townend's reference to Vol. vii of Eph. Ep. is inaccurate: in fact the Cornelia inscription is No. 79 in Vol. viii of Eph. Ep. and is to be found on p. 17.

41 McCrum, M. and Woodhead, A. G., Select Documents of the Principates of the Flavian Emperors (Cambridge, 1966), 14 (p. 27)Google Scholar. Dio also refers to the slaughter of a number of prominent men around this time (lxvii 9. 6).

42 Such senators rarely gained an ordinary consulship from the Flavian emperors; see Eck, p. 63 n. 43.

43 PIR 1, M 443.Google Scholar

44 Eck, p. 58 n.21.

45 His replacement as praef. urb. might well have been Rutilius Gallicus, who seems to have entered office around this time: Statius, , Silvae i 4. 90-3Google Scholar:… quae maxima nuper gloria, depositam Dacis pereuntibus Urbem pandere, cum tanti lectus rectoris habenas, Gallice, Fortuna non admirante subisti.

46 A number of prominent Flavian supporters were awarded a third consulship by Domitian, amongst them another son-in-law (above n. 4) of Vespasian, Q. Petillius Cerealis Caesius Rufus (above n. 34).