Cornelius Nepos, ‘‘Atticus,’’ and the Roman Revolution
Neposrecords(,),‘‘hadanotablereputationamonghiscontemporaries’’;
hisoutstandingskillinrhetoricwasnoteasytobearforhisaristocraticfellow
students(generosi condiscipuli).ItisveryappositethatNeposnamesasAtti-
cus’friendsandfellowstudentsinyouththefollowingthreepersons,who
betweenthemillustratethevarietyofsociallevelswithintheSenate:firstly,
L.Torquatus, that is, L. ManliusTorquatus, a patrician and later consul of
..; then theyounger Marius, a second-generation senator; and finally
Cicero,notyetasenator(,).
Anothersignwhichindicateshowsenatorsandequestriansshouldbeseen
asasingleclassismarriageconnections.Ofcourse,noonehaseversuggested
thatsenatorsformedalegally,orconventionally,closedgroup,whomarried
onlyamongthemselves.Butwestilltendtousetermslike‘‘senatorialaristoc-
racy’’or‘‘senatorialoligarchy’’whichareinmanywaysmisleading.Among
senatorstherewerecertainlyfamilieswithoutstandingoffice-holdingtra-
ditions(indeedweshallseethatthelifetimeofAtticuswasjusttheperiod
when,morethaneverbefore,peopletooktoemphasisinggenealogy,genu-
ineorotherwise).ButtoentertheSenate,ofsomeandthenafterSulla,
some , members, was achoice, a choice of role and life-style, made by
membersofawidersocialclass.
ThemarriageconnectionsofAtticus’familymayservetoillustratethis.
Atticus’cousin,Anicia,forinstance,wasmarriedtothebrotherofSulpicius
Rufus,thetribuneof;^15 thisfactwasonereasonforAtticus’prudentwith-
drawaltoAthensinthemids(,–).HissisterwasmarriedtoQuintus
Cicero(,),whowasalsoofcourseembarkedonasenatorialcareer.Later,
aswesaw,Atticus’daughterPomponiawasmarriedtoAgrippa.Inthiscase
NeposdoesemphasizethatsuchachoiceonAgrippa’spartwassomething
worthyofnote:Agrippa,Nepossays,onaccountofhisinfluenceandpower
ofCaesar(i.e.,Octavian),couldhavemadeanymatchhepleased;buthepre-
ferredanalliancewithAtticus,andchosethedaughterofaRomanequestrian
ratherthananaristocraticbride(generosarum nuptiae,,).
Nepos’useofthewordgenerosusisofsomeinterest.Asnotedearlier,itis
quiteclearthatwithintheSenatesomefamiliesstoodoutashavingapar-
ticularlydistinguishedhistory.Wedo,however,nowhavetoavoidusingthe
word‘‘noble’’here,orrathertobeextremelycarefulabouthowweuseit.
ForP.A.BrunthasconclusivelyshownthatGelzerinhisRoman Nobilitywas
wrong.Nobilis,asusedinthelateRepublic,wasnotinanycaseaconstitu-
. Mosteditorsread‘‘(M.)Servio,fratriSulpicii.’’ButseeH.Mattingly,Athenaeum
(): , and n. in favour of retaining the reading of the Leiden manuscript: ‘‘M.
ServiliofratriSulpicii.’’